You are on page 1of 116

THE STATUTES OF THE REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE

EVIDENCE ACT
(CHAPTER 97)

(Original Enactment: Ordinance 3 of 1893)

REVISED EDITION 1997

(20th December 1997)


Prepared and Published by
THE LAW REVISION COMMISSION
UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF
THE REVISED EDITION OF THE LAWS ACT (CHAPTER 275)

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

CHAPTER 97

Evidence Act
ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS
PART I
RELEVANCY OF FACTS
Section
Preliminary
1.
2.
3.
4.

Short title
Application of Parts I, II and III
Interpretation
Presumptions
Relevancy of facts

5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.

Evidence may be given of facts in issue and relevant facts


Relevancy of facts forming part of same transaction
Facts which are the occasion, cause or effect of facts in issue
Motive, preparation and previous or subsequent conduct
Facts necessary to explain or introduce relevant facts
Things said or done by conspirator in reference to common
design
When facts not otherwise relevant become relevant
In suits for damages facts tending to enable court to determine
amount are relevant
Facts relevant when right or custom is in question
Facts showing existence of state of mind or of body or bodily
feeling
Facts bearing on question whether act was accidental or
intentional
Existence of course of business when relevant
Admissions and confessions

17.
18.

Admission and confession defined


Admission by party to proceeding or his agent, by suitor in
representative character, etc.
1

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

1997 Ed.

Section
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24. to
31.
32.
32A.
32B.
32C.
33.

Evidence

CAP. 97

Admissions by persons whose position must be proved as against


party to suit
Admissions by persons expressly referred to by party to suit
Proof of admissions against persons making them and by or on
their behalf
When oral admissions as to contents of documents are relevant
Admissions in civil cases when relevant
30. [Repealed]
Admissions not conclusive proof but may estop
Cases in which statement of relevant fact by person who is dead
or cannot be found, etc., is relevant
Protest, greeting, etc., treated as stating fact that utterance implies
Statement of opinion
Admissibility of evidence as to credibility of maker, etc., of
statement admitted under certain provisions
Relevancy of certain evidence for proving in subsequent
proceeding the truth of facts therein stated
Statements made under special circumstances

34.
35.
36.
36A.
37.
38.
39.
40.

Entries in books of accounts when relevant


[Repealed]
[Repealed]
Rules for filing and receiving evidence and documents in court
by using information technology
Relevancy of entry in public record made in performance of duty
Relevancy of statements in maps, charts and plans
Relevancy of statement as to fact of public nature contained in
certain Ordinances, Acts or notifications
Relevancy of statements as to any law contained in law books
How much of a statement is to be proved

41.

What evidence to be given when statement forms part of a


conversation, document, book or series of letters or papers
Judgments of courts of justice when relevant

42.
43.
44.

Previous judgments relevant to bar a second suit or trial


Relevancy of certain judgments in probate, etc., jurisdiction
Relevancy and effect of judgments, orders or decrees other than
those mentioned in section 43

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

CAP. 97

Section
45.
45A.
46.

Evidence

Judgments, etc., other than those mentioned in sections 42 to 44


when relevant
Relevance of convictions and acquittals
Fraud or collusion in obtaining judgment or incompetency of
court may be proved
Opinions of third persons when relevant

47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.

Opinions of experts
Facts bearing upon opinions of experts
Opinion as to handwriting when relevant
Opinion as to existence of right or custom when relevant
Opinion as to usages, tenets, etc., when relevant
Opinion on relationship when relevant
Grounds of opinion when relevant
Character when relevant

54.
55.
56.
57.

In civil cases character to prove conduct imputed irrelevant


In criminal cases previous good character relevant
Admissibility of evidence and questions about accuseds
disposition or reputation
Character as affecting damages
PART II
PROOF
Facts which need not be proved

58.
59.
60.

Fact judicially noticeable need not be proved


Facts of which court must take judicial notice
Facts admitted need not be proved
Oral evidence

61.
62.
62A.

Proof of facts by oral evidence


Oral evidence must be direct
Evidence through live video or live television links
Documentary evidence

63.
64.

1997 Ed.

Proof of contents of documents


Primary evidence
Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Section
65.
66.
67.
67A.
68.
68A.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.

Evidence

CAP. 97

Secondary evidence
Proof of documents by primary evidence
Cases in which secondary evidence relating to documents may be
given
Proof of documents in certain cases
Rules as to notice to produce
Manner of giving voluminous or complex evidence
Proof of signature and handwriting of person alleged to have
signed or written document produced
Proof of execution of document required by law to be attested
Proof where no attesting witness found
Admission of execution by party to attested document
Proof when attesting witness denies the execution
Proof of document not required by law to be attested
Comparison of signature, writing or seal with others admitted or
proved
Public documents

76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
80A.

Public documents
Private documents
Certified copies of public documents
Proof of documents by production of certified copies
Proof of other official documents
Prints from films in the possession of the Government and
statutory body
Presumptions as to documents

81.
82.
83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
88.
89.
90.

Presumption as to genuineness of certified copies


Presumption as to documents produced as record of evidence
Presumption as to Gazettes, newspapers and other documents
Presumption as to document admissible in England without proof
of seal or signature
Presumption as to maps or plans made by authority of
Government
Presumption as to collections of laws and reports of decisions
Presumption as to powers of attorney
Presumption as to certified copies of foreign judicial records
Presumption as to books, maps and charts
Presumption as to telegraphic messages

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

CAP. 97

Section
91.
92.

Evidence

1997 Ed.

Presumption as to due execution, etc., of documents not


produced
Presumption as to documents 30 years old
Exclusion of oral by documentary evidence

93.
94.
95.
96.
97.
98.
99.
100.
101.
102.

Evidence of terms of contracts, grants and other dispositions of


property reduced to form of document
Exclusion of evidence of oral agreement
Exclusion of evidence to explain or amend ambiguous document
Exclusion of evidence against application of document to
existing facts
Evidence as to document meaningless in reference to existing
facts
Evidence as to application of language which can apply to one
only of several persons
Evidence as to application of language to one of two sets of facts
to neither of which the whole correctly applies
Evidence as to meaning of illegible characters, etc.
Who may give evidence of agreement varying terms of document
Construction of wills not affected by sections 93 to 101
PART III
PRODUCTION AND EFFECT OF EVIDENCE
Burden of proof

103.
104.
105.
106.
107.
108.
109.
110.
111.
112.

Burden of proof
On whom burden of proof lies
Burden of proof as to particular fact
Burden of proving fact to be proved to make evidence admissible
Burden of proving that case of accused comes within exceptions
Burden of proving fact especially within knowledge
Burden of proving death of person known to have been alive
within 30 years
Burden of proving that person is alive who has not been heard of
for 7 years
Burden of proof as to relationship in the cases of partners,
landlord and tenant, principal and agent
Burden of proof as to ownership

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Section
113.
114.
115.
116.
116A.

Evidence

CAP. 97

Proof of good faith in transactions where one party is in relation


of active confidence
Rebuttable presumption of paternity
[Repealed]
Court may presume existence of certain fact
Presumptions in relation to electronic records
Estoppel

117.
118.
119.

Estoppel
Estoppel of tenant and of licensee of person in possession
Estoppel of bailee or licensee
Witnesses

120.
121.
122.
123.
124.
125.
126.
127.
128.
128A.
129.
130.
131.
132.
133.
134.
135.
136.

Who may testify


Dumb witnesses
Parties to civil suit and their wives or husbands, and husband or
wife of person under criminal trial
Judges and Magistrates
Communications during marriage
Evidence as to affairs of State
Official communications
Information as to commission of offences
Professional communications
Communications with legal counsel in entity
Sections 128 and 128A to apply to interpreters, etc.
Privilege not waived by volunteering evidence
Confidential communications with legal advisers
Production of title deeds of witness not a party
Production of documents which another person having
possession could refuse to produce
Witness not excused from answering on ground that answer will
criminate
Accomplice
Number of witnesses
Examination of witnesses

137.
138.
139.

Order of production and examination of witnesses


Court to decide as to admissibility of evidence
Examination-in-chief, cross-examination and re-examination

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

CAP. 97

Section
140.
141.
142.
143.
144.
145.
146.
147.
148.
149.
150.
151.
152.
153.
154.
155.
156.
157.
158.
159.
160.
160A.
161.
162.
163.
164.
165.
166.
167.
168.

Evidence

Order of examinations and direction of re-examination


Cross-examination of person called to produce a document
Witnesses to character
Leading questions
When they must not be asked
When they may be asked
Evidence as to matters in writing
Cross-examination as to previous statements in writing
Questions lawful in cross-examination
When witness to be compelled to answer
Court to decide when question shall be asked and when witness
compelled to answer
Question not to be asked without reasonable grounds
Procedure of court in case of question being asked without
reasonable grounds
Indecent and scandalous questions
Questions intended to insult or annoy
Exclusion of evidence to contradict answers to questions testing
veracity
Questions by party to his own witness
Impeaching credit of witness
Questions tending to corroborate evidence of relevant fact
admissible
Former statements of witness may be proved to corroborate later
testimony as to same fact
What matters may be proved in connection with proved
statement relevant under section 32 or 33
Evidence not capable of corroboration
Refreshing memory
Testimony to facts stated in document mentioned in section 161
Right of adverse party as to writing used to refresh memory
Production and translation of documents
Giving as evidence document called for and produced on notice
Using as evidence document production of which was refused on
notice
Judges power to put questions or order production
Power of assessors to put questions
Improper admission and rejection of evidence

169.

1997 Ed.

No new trial for improper admission or rejection of evidence


Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

Evidence

1997 Ed.

CAP. 97

PART IV
BANKERS BOOKS
Section
170.
171.
172.
173.
174.
175.
176.

Interpretation
Mode of proof of entries in bankers books
Proof that book is a bankers book
Verification of copy
Production by, or appearance of, officer of bank
Court or Judge may order inspection
Costs
The Schedule

An Act relating to the law of evidence.


[1st July 1893]
PART I
RELEVANCY OF FACTS
Preliminary
Short title
1. This Act may be cited as the Evidence Act.
Application of Parts I, II and III
2.(1) Parts I, II and III shall apply to all judicial proceedings in or
before any court, but not to affidavits presented to any court or officer
nor to proceedings before an arbitrator.
(2) All rules of evidence not contained in any written law, so far as
such rules are inconsistent with any of the provisions of this Act, are
repealed.
Interpretation
3.(1) In Parts I, II and III, unless the context otherwise requires
[Deleted by Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]
[Deleted by Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]
Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

copy of a document includes


(a) in the case of a document falling within paragraph (d)
but not paragraph (e) of the definition of document, a
transcript of the sounds or other data embodied in it;
(b) in the case of a document falling within paragraph (e)
but not paragraph (d) of that definition, a reproduction
or still reproduction of the image or images embodied in
it, whether enlarged or not;
(c) in the case of a document falling within paragraphs (d)
and (e) of that definition, such a transcript together with
such a still reproduction; and
(d) in the case of a document not falling within
paragraph (e) of that definition of which a visual
image is embodied in a document falling within that
paragraph, a reproduction of that image, whether
enlarged or not,
and any reference to a copy of the material part of a document
must be construed accordingly;
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

court includes all Judges and Magistrates and, except


arbitrators, all persons legally authorised to take evidence;
document includes, in addition to a document in writing
(a) any map, plan, graph or drawing;
(b) any photograph;
(c) any label, marking or other writing which identifies or
describes anything of which it forms a part, or to which
it is attached by any means whatsoever;
(d) any disc, tape, sound-track or other device in which
sounds or other data (not being visual images) are
embodied so as to be capable (with or without the aid of
some other equipment) of being reproduced therefrom;
(e) any film (including microfilm), negative, tape, disc or
other device in which one or more visual images are
embodied so as to be capable (with or without the aid of
Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

Evidence

1997 Ed.

CAP. 97

10

some other equipment) of being reproduced therefrom;


and
(f) any paper or other material on which there are marks,
impressions, figures, letters, symbols or perforations
having a meaning for persons qualified to interpret
them;
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

electronic record means a record generated, communicated,


received or stored by electronic, magnetic, optical or other
means in an information system or transmitted from one
information system to another;
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

evidence includes
(a) all statements which the court permits or requires to be
made before it by witnesses in relation to matters of fact
under inquiry: such statements are called oral evidence;
(b) all documents produced for the inspection of the court:
such documents are called documentary evidence;
fact includes
(a) any thing, state of things, or relation of things, capable
of being received by the senses;
(b) any mental condition of which any person is conscious;
Illustrations
(a) That there are certain objects arranged in a certain order in a certain
place is a fact.
(b) That a man heard or saw something is a fact.
(c) That a man said certain words is a fact.
(d) That a man holds a certain opinion, has a certain intention, acts in
good faith or fraudulently, or uses a particular word in a particular
sense, or is or was at a specified time conscious of a particular
sensation, is a fact.
(e) That a man has a certain reputation is a fact.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

11

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

fact in issue includes any fact from which either by itself or in


connection with other facts the existence, non-existence,
nature or extent of any right, liability or disability asserted or
denied in any suit or proceeding necessarily follows.
Illustrations
A is accused of the murder of B.
At his trial the following facts may be in issue:
that A caused Bs death;
that A intended to cause Bs death;
that A had received grave and sudden provocation from B;
that A at the time of doing the act which caused Bs death was by reason
of unsoundness of mind incapable of knowing its nature.

Relevant
(2) One fact is said to be relevant to another when the one is
connected with the other in any of the ways referred to in the
provisions of this Act relating to the relevancy of facts.
Proved
(3) A fact is said to be proved when, after considering the matters
before it, the court either believes it to exist or considers its existence
so probable that a prudent man ought, under the circumstances of the
particular case, to act upon the supposition that it exists.
Disproved
(4) A fact is said to be disproved when, after considering the
matters before it, the court either believes that it does not exist or
considers its non-existence so probable that a prudent man ought,
under the circumstances of the particular case, to act upon the
supposition that it does not exist.
Not proved
(5) A fact is said to be not proved when it is neither proved nor
disproved.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

Evidence

1997 Ed.

CAP. 97

12

(6) For the purposes of sections 23, 128, 130 and 131, a reference to
advocate or solicitor therein shall include a reference to any public
officer in the Attorney-Generals Chambers when he acts as an
advocate or a solicitor.
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

(7) For the purposes of sections 23, 128A, 130 and 131, a legal
counsel means
(a) a person (by whatever name called) who is an employee of an
entity employed to undertake the provision of legal advice or
assistance in connection with the application of the law or any
form of resolution of legal disputes;
[Act 41 of 2014 wef 01/01/2015]

(aa) any Deputy AttorneyGeneral; or


[Act 41 of 2014 wef 01/01/2015]

(b) a public officer in the Singapore Legal Service


(i) working in a ministry or department of the
Government or an Organ of State as legal adviser to
that ministry or department or Organ of State; or
(ii) seconded as legal adviser to any statutory body
established or constituted by or under a public Act
for a public function.
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

Presumptions
4.(1) Whenever it is provided by this Act that the court may
presume a fact, it may either regard such fact as proved unless and
until it is disproved, or may call for proof of it.
(2) Whenever it is directed by this Act that the court shall presume a
fact, it shall regard such fact as proved unless and until it is disproved.
(3) When one fact is declared by this Act to be conclusive proof of
another, the court shall, on proof of the one fact, regard the other as
proved, and shall not allow evidence to be given for the purpose of
disproving it.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

13

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

Relevancy of facts
Evidence may be given of facts in issue and relevant facts
5. Evidence may be given in any suit or proceeding of the existence
or non-existence of every fact in issue and of such other facts as are
hereinafter declared to be relevant, and of no others.
Explanation This section shall not enable any person to give evidence of a
fact which he is disentitled to prove by any provision of the law for the time being
in force relating to civil procedure.
Illustrations
(a) A is tried for the murder of B by beating him with a club with the intention
of causing his death.
At As trial the following facts are in issue:
As beating B with the club;
As causing Bs death by such beating;
As intention to cause Bs death.
(b) A, a party to a suit, does not comply with a notice given by B, the other
party, to produce for Bs inspection a document referred to in As pleadings.
This section does not enable A to put such document in evidence on his
behalf in such suit, otherwise than in accordance with the conditions
prescribed by the Rules of Court or the Family Justice Rules (as the case
may be).
[Act 27 of 2014 wef 01/10/2014]

Relevancy of facts forming part of same transaction


6. Facts which, though not in issue, are so connected with a fact in
issue as to form part of the same transaction are relevant, whether they
occurred at the same time and place or at different times and places.
Illustrations
(a) A is accused of the murder of B by beating him. Whatever was said or done
by A or B or the bystanders at the beating or so shortly before or after it as
to form part of the transaction is a relevant fact.
(b) A is accused of waging war against the Government by taking part in an
armed insurrection in which property is destroyed, troops are attacked and
gaols are broken open. The occurrence of these facts is relevant as forming
part of the general transaction, though A may not have been present at all of
them.
Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

14

(c) A sues B for a libel contained in a letter forming part of a correspondence.


Letters between the parties relating to the subject out of which the libel
arose and forming part of the correspondence in which it is contained are
relevant facts though they do not contain the libel itself.
(d) The question is whether certain goods ordered from B were delivered to A.
The goods were delivered to several intermediate persons successively.
Each delivery is a relevant fact.

Facts which are the occasion, cause or effect of facts in issue


7. Facts which are the occasion, cause or effect, immediate or
otherwise, of relevant facts or facts in issue, or which constitute the
state of things under which they happened or which afforded an
opportunity for their occurrence or transaction, are relevant.
Illustrations
(a) The question is whether A robbed B.
The facts that shortly before the robbery B went to a fair with money in his
possession, and that he showed or mentioned the fact that he had it to third persons,
are relevant.
(b) The question is whether A murdered B. Marks on the ground produced by a
struggle at or near the place where the murder was committed are relevant
facts.
(c) The question is whether A poisoned B. The state of Bs health before the
symptoms ascribed to poison and habits of B known to A which afforded
an opportunity for the administration of poison, are relevant facts.

Motive, preparation and previous or subsequent conduct


8.(1) Any fact is relevant which shows or constitutes a motive or
preparation for any fact in issue or relevant fact.
(2) The conduct of any party or of any agent to any party to any suit
or proceeding in reference to such suit or proceeding or in reference to
any fact in issue therein or relevant thereto, and the conduct of any
person an offence against whom is the subject of any proceeding, is
relevant if such conduct influences or is influenced by any fact in issue
or relevant fact, and whether it was previous or subsequent thereto.
Explanation 1.The word conduct in this section does not include
statements unless those statements accompany and explain acts other than

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

15

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

statements; but this explanation is not to affect the relevancy of statements under
any other section of this Act.
Explanation 2.When the conduct of any person is relevant any statement
made to him or in his presence and hearing which affects such conduct is relevant.
Illustrations
(a) A is tried for the murder of B.
The facts that A murdered C, that B knew that A had murdered C and that B
had tried to extort money from A by threatening to make his knowledge public, are
relevant.
(b) A sues B upon a bond for the payment of money. B denies the making of
the bond.
The fact that at the time when the bond was alleged to be made B required
money for a particular purpose is relevant.
(c) A is tried for the murder of B by poison.
The fact that before the death of B, A procured poison similar to that which
was administered to B is relevant.
(d) The question is whether a certain document is the will of A.
The facts that not long before the date of the alleged will A made inquiry into
matters to which the provisions of the alleged will relate, that he consulted lawyers
in reference to making the will, and that he caused drafts of other wills to be
prepared of which he did not approve are relevant.
(e) A is accused of a crime.
The facts that either before, or at the time of or after the alleged crime, A
provided evidence which would tend to give to the facts of the case an appearance
favourable to himself, or that he destroyed or concealed evidence or prevented the
presence or procured the absence of persons who might have been witnesses, or
suborned persons to give false evidence respecting it, are relevant.
(f) The question is whether A robbed B.
The facts that after B was robbed, C said in As presence: The police are
coming to look for the man who robbed B, and that immediately afterwards A ran
away are relevant.
(g) The question is whether A owes B $10,000.
The facts that A asked C to lend him money, and that D said to C in As
presence and hearing: I advise you not to trust A for he owes B $10,000, and that
A went away without making any answer, are relevant facts.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

Evidence

1997 Ed.

CAP. 97

16

(h) The question is whether A committed a crime.


The fact that A absconded after receiving a letter warning him that inquiry was
being made for the criminal, and the contents of the letter, are relevant.
(i) A is accused of a crime.
The facts that after the commission of the alleged crime he absconded, or was
in possession of property or the proceeds of property acquired by the crime, or
attempted to conceal things which were or might have been used in committing it,
are relevant.
(j) The question is whether A was ravished.
The facts that shortly after the alleged rape she made a complaint relating to
the crime, the circumstances under which and the terms in which the complaint was
made, are relevant.
The fact that without making a complaint she said that she had been ravished
is not relevant as conduct under this section, though it may be relevant as a dying
declaration under section 32(1)(a), or as corroborative evidence under section 159.
(k) The question is whether A was robbed.
The fact that soon after the alleged robbery he made a complaint relating to the
offence, the circumstances under which and the terms in which the complaint was
made, are relevant.
The fact that he said he had been robbed without making any complaint is not
relevant as conduct under this section, though it may be relevant as a dying
declaration under section 32(1)(a), or as corroborative evidence under section 159.
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

Facts necessary to explain or introduce relevant facts


9. Facts necessary to explain or introduce a fact in issue or relevant
fact, or which support or rebut an inference suggested by a fact in issue
or relevant fact, or which establish the identity of any thing or person
whose identity is relevant, or fix the time or place at which any fact in
issue or relevant fact happened or which show the relation of parties
by whom any such fact was transacted, are relevant in so far as they
are necessary for that purpose.
Illustrations
(a) The question is whether a given document is the will of A.
The state of As property and of his family at the date of the alleged will may
be relevant facts.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

17

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

(b) A sues B for libel imputing disgraceful conduct to A; B affirms that the
matter alleged to be libellous is true.
The position and relations of the parties at the time when the libel was
published may be relevant facts as introductory to the facts in issue.
The particulars of a dispute between A and B about a matter unconnected with
the alleged libel are irrelevant, though the fact that there was a dispute may be
relevant if it affected the relations between A and B.
(c) A is accused of a crime.
The fact that soon after the commission of the crime A absconded from his
house is relevant under section 8 as conduct subsequent to and affected by facts in
issue.
The fact that at the time when he left home he had sudden and urgent business
at the place to which he went is relevant as tending to explain the fact that he left
home suddenly.
The details of the business on which he left are not relevant, except in so far as
they are necessary to show that the business was sudden and urgent.
(d) A sues B for inducing C to break a contract of service made by him with A.
C on leaving As service says to A: I am leaving you because B has made
me a better offer. This statement is a relevant fact as explanatory of Cs
conduct, which is relevant as a fact in issue.
(e) A accused of theft is seen to give the stolen property to B who is seen to
give it to As wife. B says as he delivers it: A says you are to hide this. Bs
statement is relevant as explanatory of a fact which is part of the
transaction.
(f) A is tried for a riot and is proved to have marched at the head of a mob. The
cries of the mob are relevant as explanatory of the nature of the transaction.
(g) A seeks to adduce evidence against B in the form of an electronic record.
The method and manner in which the electronic record was (properly or
improperly) generated, communicated, received or stored (by A or B), the
reliability of the devices and the circumstances in which the devices were
(properly or improperly) used or operated to generate, communicate,
receive or store the electronic record, may be relevant facts (if the contents
are relevant) as authenticating the electronic record and therefore as
explaining or introducing the electronic record, or identifying it as the
relevant electronic record to support a finding that the record is, or is not,
what its proponent A claims.
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

18

Things said or done by conspirator in reference to common


design
10. Where there is reasonable ground to believe that 2 or more
persons have conspired together to commit an offence or an actionable
wrong, anything said, done or written by any one of such persons, in
reference to their common intention after the time when such intention
was first entertained by any one of them, is a relevant fact as against
each of the persons believed to be so conspiring, as well for the
purpose of proving the existence of the conspiracy as for the purpose
of showing that any such person was a party to it.
Illustrations
Reasonable ground exists for believing that A has joined in a conspiracy to
wage war against the Government.
The facts that B procured arms in Europe for the purpose of the conspiracy, C
collected money in Malacca for a like object, D persuaded persons to join the
conspiracy in Province Wellesley, E published writings advocating the object in
view at Singapore, and F transmitted from Singapore to G at Jakarta the money
which C had collected at Malacca, and the contents of a letter written by H giving
an account of the conspiracy are each relevant, both to prove the existence of the
conspiracy and to prove As complicity in it, although he may have been ignorant of
all of them, and although the persons by whom they were done were strangers to
him, and although they may have taken place before he joined the conspiracy or
after he left it.

When facts not otherwise relevant become relevant


11. Facts not otherwise relevant are relevant
(a) if they are inconsistent with any fact in issue or relevant fact;
(b) if by themselves or in connection with other facts they make
the existence or non-existence of any fact in issue or relevant
fact highly probable or improbable.
Illustrations
(a) The question is whether A committed a crime at Singapore on a certain day.
The fact that on that day A was at Penang is relevant.
The fact that near the time when the crime was committed A was at a distance
from the place where it was committed, which would render it highly improbable,
though not impossible, that he committed it, is relevant.
Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

19

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

(b) The question is whether A committed a crime.


The circumstances are such that the crime must have been committed either
by A, B, C or D. Every fact which shows that the crime could have been committed
by no one else and that it was not committed by either B, C or D is relevant.

In suits for damages facts tending to enable court to determine


amount are relevant
12. In suits in which damages are claimed, any fact which will
enable the court to determine the amount of damages which ought to
be awarded is relevant.
Facts relevant when right or custom is in question
13. Where the question is as to the existence of any right or custom,
the following facts are relevant:
(a) any transaction by which the right or custom in question was
created, claimed, modified, recognised, asserted or denied or
which was inconsistent with its existence; and
(b) particular instances in which the right or custom was claimed,
recognised or exercised or in which its exercise was disputed,
asserted or departed from.
Illustration
The question is whether A has a right to a fishery. A deed conferring the
fishery on As ancestors, a mortgage of the fishery by As father, a subsequent grant
of the fishery by As father irreconcilable with the mortgage, particular instances in
which As father exercised the right, or in which the exercise of the right was
stopped by As neighbours, are relevant facts.

Facts showing existence of state of mind or of body or bodily


feeling
14. Facts showing the existence of any state of mind, such as
intention, knowledge, good faith, negligence, rashness, ill-will or
good-will towards any particular person, or showing the existence of
any state of body or bodily feeling, are relevant when the existence of
any such state of mind or body or bodily feeling is in issue or relevant.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

20

Explanation 1.A fact relevant as showing the existence of a relevant state of


mind must show that the state of mind exists not generally but in reference to the
particular matter in question.
Explanation 2.But where upon the trial of a person accused of an offence
the previous commission by the accused of an offence is relevant within the
meaning of this section, the previous conviction of such person shall also be a
relevant fact.
Illustrations
(a) A is accused of receiving stolen goods, knowing them to be stolen. It is
proved that he was in possession of a particular stolen article.
The fact that at the same time he was in possession of many other stolen
articles is relevant as tending to show that he knew each and all of the articles of
which he was in possession to be stolen.
(b) A is accused of fraudulently delivering to another person a counterfeit coin,
which at the time when he delivered it he knew to be counterfeit.
The fact that at the time of its delivery A was possessed of a number of other
pieces of counterfeit coin is relevant.
The fact that A had been previously convicted of delivering to another person
as genuine a counterfeit coin, knowing it to be counterfeit, is relevant.
(c) A sues B for damage done by a dog of Bs, which B knew to be ferocious.
The facts that the dog had previously bitten X, Y and Z and that they had made
complaints to B are relevant.
(d) The question is whether A, the acceptor of a bill of exchange, knew that the
name of the payee was fictitious.
The fact that A had accepted other bills drawn in the same manner before they
could have been transmitted to him by the payee, if the payee had been a real
person, is relevant, as showing that A knew that the payee was a fictitious person.
(e) A is accused of defaming B by publishing an imputation intended to harm
the reputation of B.
The fact of previous publications by A respecting B showing ill-will on the
part of A towards B is relevant, as proving As intention to harm Bs reputation by
the particular publication in question.
The facts that there was no previous quarrel between A and B and that A
repeated the matter complained of as he heard it, are relevant as showing that A did
not intend to harm the reputation of B.
(f) A is sued by B for fraudulently representing to B that C was solvent,
whereby B being induced to trust C, who was insolvent, suffered loss.
Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

21

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

The fact that at the time when A represented C to be solvent C was supposed to
be solvent by his neighbours, and by persons dealing with him, is relevant, as
showing that A made the representation in good faith.
(g) A is sued by B for the price of work done by B upon a house of which A is
owner by the order of C, a contractor.
As defence is that Bs contract was with C.
The fact that A paid C for the work in question is relevant as providing that A
did in good faith make over to C the management of the work in question, so that C
was in a position to contract with B on Cs own account and not as agent for A.
(h) A is accused of the dishonest misappropriation of property which he had
found, and the question is whether, when he appropriated it he believed in
good faith that the real owner could not be found.
The fact that public notice of the loss of the property had been given in the
place where A was, is relevant as showing that A did not in good faith believe that
the real owner of the property could not be found.
The fact that A knew or had reason to believe that the notice was given
fraudulently by C who had heard of the loss of the property and wished to set up a
false claim to it, is relevant as showing that the fact that A knew of the notice did not
disprove As good faith.
(i) A is charged with shooting at B with intent to kill him.
In order to show As intent, the fact of As having previously shot at B may be
proved.
(j) A is charged with sending threatening letters to B.
Threatening letters previously sent by A to B may be proved as showing the
intention of the letters.
(k) The question is whether A has been guilty of cruelty towards B his wife.
Expression of their feelings towards each other shortly before or after the
alleged cruelty are relevant facts.
(l) The question is whether As death was caused by poison.
Statements made by A during his illness as to his symptoms are relevant facts.
(m) The question is, what was the state of As health at the time when an
assurance on his life was effected? Statements made by A as to the state of
his health at or near the time in question are relevant facts.
(n) A sues B for negligence in providing him with a motor car for hire not
reasonably fit for use whereby A was injured.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

Evidence

1997 Ed.

CAP. 97

22

The fact that Bs attention was drawn on other occasions to the defect of that
particular motor car is relevant.
The fact that B was habitually negligent about the motor cars which he let to
hire is irrelevant.
(o) A is tried for the murder of B by intentionally shooting him dead.
The fact that A on other occasions shot at B is relevant as showing his
intention to shoot B.
The fact that A was in the habit of shooting at people with intent to murder
them is irrelevant.
(p) A is tried for a crime.
The fact that he said something indicating an intention to commit that
particular crime is relevant.
The fact that he said something indicating a general disposition to commit
crimes of that class is irrelevant.

Facts bearing on question whether act was accidental or


intentional
15. When there is a question whether an act was accidental or
intentional or done with a particular knowledge or intention, the fact
that such act formed part of a series of similar occurrences, in each of
which the person doing the act was concerned, is relevant.
Illustrations
(a) A is accused of burning down his house in order to obtain money for which
it is insured.
The facts that A lived in several houses successively, each of which he
insured, in each of which a fire occurred, and after each of which fires A received
payment from a different insurance office, are relevant as tending to show that the
fire was not accidental.
(b) A is employed to receive money from the debtors of B. It is As duty to
make entries in a book showing the amounts received by him. He makes an
entry showing that on a particular occasion he received less than he really
did receive.
The question is whether this false entry was accidental or intentional.
The facts that other entries made by A in the same book are false, and that the
false entry is in each case in favour of A, are relevant.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

23

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

(c) A is accused of fraudulently delivering to B a counterfeit dollar.


The question is whether the delivery of the dollar was accidental.
The facts that soon before or soon after the delivery to B, A delivered
counterfeit dollars to C, D and E are relevant as showing that the delivery to B was
not accidental.

Existence of course of business when relevant


16. When there is a question whether a particular act was done, the
existence of any course of business, according to which it naturally
would have been done, is a relevant fact.
Illustrations
(a) The question is whether a particular letter was despatched.
The facts that it was the ordinary course of business for all letters put in a
certain place to be carried to the post, and that that particular letter was put in that
place, are relevant.
(b) The question is whether a particular letter reached A.
The facts that it was posted in due course and was not returned through the
Dead Letter Office are relevant.

Admissions and confessions


Admission and confession defined
17.(1) An admission is a statement, oral or documentary, which
suggests any inference as to any fact in issue or relevant fact, and
which is made by any of the persons and under the circumstances
hereinafter mentioned.
(2) A confession is an admission made at any time by a person
accused of an offence, stating or suggesting the inference that he
committed that offence.
Admission by party to proceeding or his agent, by suitor in
representative character, etc.
18.(1) Statements made by a party to the proceeding or by an
agent to any such party whom the court regards under the
circumstances of the case as expressly or impliedly authorised by
him to make them are admissions.
Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

Evidence

1997 Ed.

CAP. 97

24

(2) Statements made by parties to suits, suing or sued in a


representative character, are not admissions unless they were made
while the party making them held that character.
(3) Statements made by
(a) persons who have any proprietary or pecuniary interest in the
subject-matter of the proceeding, and who make the statement
in their character of persons so interested; or
(b) persons from whom the parties to the suit have derived their
interest in the subject-matter of the suit,
are admissions if they are made during the continuance of the interest
of the persons making the statements.
Admissions by persons whose position must be proved as
against party to suit
19. Statements made by persons whose position or liability it is
necessary to prove as against any party to the suit are admissions if the
statements would be relevant as against the persons in relation to the
position or liability in a suit brought by or against them, and if they are
made whilst the person making them occupies the position or is
subject to the liability.
Illustration
A undertakes to collect rents for B.
B sues A for not collecting rent due from C to B.
A denies that rent was due from C to B.
A statement by C that he owed B rent is an admission and is a relevant fact, as
against A, if A denies that C did owe rent to B.

Admissions by persons expressly referred to by party to suit


20. Statements made by persons to whom a party to the suit has
expressly referred for information in reference to a matter in dispute
are admissions.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

25

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

Illustration
The question is whether a horse sold by A to B is sound.
A says to B: Go and ask C, C knows all about it. Cs statement is an
admission.

Proof of admissions against persons making them and by or on


their behalf
21. Admissions are relevant and may be proved as against the
person who makes them or his representative in interest; but they
cannot be proved by or on behalf of the person who makes them or by
his representative in interest except in the following cases:
(a) an admission may be proved by or on behalf of the person
making it when it is of such a nature that, if the person making
it were dead, it would be relevant as between third persons
under section 32;
(b) an admission may be proved by or on behalf of the person
making it when it consists of a statement of the existence of
any state of mind or body relevant or in issue, made at or
about the time when such state of mind or body existed and is
accompanied by conduct rendering its falsehood improbable;
and
(c) an admission may be proved by or on behalf of the person
making it if it is relevant otherwise than as an admission.
Illustrations
(a) The question between A and B is whether a certain deed is or is not forged.
A affirms that it is genuine; B that it is forged.
A may prove a statement by B that the deed is genuine, and B may prove a
statement by A that the deed is forged; but A cannot prove a statement by himself
that the deed is genuine, nor can B prove a statement by himself that the deed is
forged.
(b) A, the captain of a ship, is tried for casting her away.
Evidence is given to show that the ship was taken out of her proper course.
A produces a book kept by him in the ordinary course of his business, showing
observations alleged to have been taken by him from day to day, and indicating that
the ship was not taken out of her proper course. A may prove these statements

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

26

because they would be admissible between third parties if he were dead under
section 32(1)(b).
(c) A is accused of a crime committed by him at Singapore. He produces a
letter written by himself and dated at Penang on that day, and bearing the
Penang postmark of that day.
The statement in the date of the letter is admissible, because if A were dead it
would be admissible under section 32(1)(b).
(d) A is accused of receiving stolen goods, knowing them to be stolen.
He offers to prove that he refused to sell them below their value.
A may prove these statements though they are admissions, because they are
explanatory of conduct influenced by facts in issue.
(e) A is accused of fraudulently having in his possession counterfeit coin
which he knew to be counterfeit.
He offers to prove that he asked a skilful person to examine the coin as he
doubted whether it was counterfeit or not, and that that person did examine it and
told him it was genuine.
A may prove these facts for the reasons stated in illustration (d).
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

When oral admissions as to contents of documents are relevant


22. Oral admissions as to the contents of a document are not relevant
unless the party proposing to prove them shows that he is entitled to
give secondary evidence of the contents of the document under the
rules contained in this Act, or unless the genuineness of a document
produced is in question.
Admissions in civil cases when relevant
23.(1) In civil cases, no admission is relevant if it is made
(a) upon an express condition that evidence of it is not to be
given; or
(b) upon circumstances from which the court can infer that the
parties agreed together that evidence of it should not be given.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

27

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

(2) Nothing in subsection (1) shall be taken


(a) to exempt any advocate or solicitor from giving evidence of
any matter of which he may be compelled to give evidence
under section 128; or
(b) to exempt any legal counsel in an entity from giving evidence
of any matter of which he may be compelled to give evidence
under section 128A.
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

24. to 30. [Repealed by Act 15/2010 wef 02/01/2011]


Admissions not conclusive proof but may estop
31. Admissions are not conclusive proof of the matters admitted, but
they may operate as estoppels under the provisions in this Act.
Cases in which statement of relevant fact by person who is dead
or cannot be found, etc., is relevant
32.(1) Subject to subsections (2) and (3), statements of relevant
facts made by a person (whether orally, in a document or otherwise),
are themselves relevant facts in the following cases:
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

when it relates to cause of death;


(a) when the statement is made by a person as to the cause of his
death, or as to any of the circumstances of the transaction which
resulted in his death, in cases in which the cause of that persons
death comes into question; such statements are relevant
whether the person who made them was or was not at the
time when they were made under expectation of death, and
whatever may be the nature of the proceeding in which the
cause of his death comes into question;
or is made in course of trade, business, profession or other
occupation;
(b) when the statement was made by a person in the ordinary
course of a trade, business, profession or other occupation and
in particular when it consists of

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

28

(i) any entry or memorandum in books kept in the ordinary


course of a trade, business, profession or other occupation
or in the discharge of professional duty;
(ii) an acknowledgment (whether written or signed) for the
receipt of money, goods, securities or property of any
kind;
(iii) any information in market quotations, tabulations, lists,
directories or other compilations generally used and relied
upon by the public or by persons in particular
occupations; or
(iv) a document constituting, or forming part of, the records
(whether past or present) of a trade, business, profession
or other occupation that are recorded, owned or kept by
any person, body or organisation carrying out the trade,
business, profession or other occupation,
and includes a statement made in a document that is, or forms
part of, a record compiled by a person acting in the ordinary
course of a trade, business, profession or other occupation
based on information supplied by other persons;
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

or against interest of maker;


(c) when the statement is against the pecuniary or proprietary
interest of the person making it, or when, if true, it would
expose him or would have exposed him to a criminal
prosecution or to a suit for damages;
or gives opinion as to public right or custom or matters of
general interest;
(d) when the statement gives the opinion of any such person as to
the existence of any public right or custom or matter of public
or general interest, of the existence of which if it existed he
would have been likely to be aware, and when such statement
was made before any controversy as to such right, custom or
matter had arisen;
or relates to existence of relationship;
Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

29

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

(e) when the statement relates to the existence of any relationship


by blood, marriage or adoption between persons as to whose
relationship by blood, marriage or adoption the person making
the statement had special means of knowledge, and when the
statement was made before the question in dispute was raised;
or is made in will or deed relating to family affairs;
(f) when the statement relates to the existence of any relationship
by blood, marriage or adoption between persons deceased, and
is made in any will or deed relating to the affairs of the family to
which any such deceased person belonged, or in any family
pedigree or upon any tombstone, family portrait or other thing
on which such statements are usually made, and when such
statement was made before the question in dispute was raised;
or in document relating to transaction mentioned in
section 13(a);
(g) when the statement is contained in any deed or other document
which relates to any such transaction as is mentioned in
section 13(a);
or is made by several persons and expresses feelings relevant to
matter in question;
(h) when the statement was made by a number of persons and
expressed feelings or impressions on their part relevant to the
matter in question;
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

or is made by person who is compellable but refuses to give


evidence;
(i) when the statement was made by a person who, being
compellable to give evidence on behalf of the party desiring
to give the statement in evidence, attends or is brought before
the court, but refuses to be sworn or affirmed, or is sworn or
affirmed but refuses to give any evidence;
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

or is made by person who is dead or who cannot be produced as


witness;
Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

Evidence

1997 Ed.

CAP. 97

30

(j) when the statement is made by a person in respect of whom it is


shown
(i) is dead or unfit because of his bodily or mental condition
to attend as a witness;
(ii) that despite reasonable efforts to locate him, he cannot be
found whether within or outside Singapore;
(iii) that he is outside Singapore and it is not practicable to
secure his attendance; or
(iv) that, being competent but not compellable to give
evidence on behalf of the party desiring to give the
statement in evidence, he refuses to do so;
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

or by agreement.
(k) when the parties to the proceedings agree that for the purpose of
those proceedings the statement may be given in evidence.
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

Illustrations
(a) The question is whether A was murdered by B.
A dies of injuries received in a transaction in the course of which she was
ravished.
The question is whether she was ravished by B; or
The question is whether A was killed by B under such circumstances that a suit
would lie against B by As widow.
Statements made by A as to the cause of his or her death, referring respectively
to the murder, the rape and the actionable wrong under consideration, are relevant
facts.
(b) The question is as to the date of As birth.
An entry in the diary of a deceased surgeon regularly kept in the course of
business, stating that on a given day he attended As mother and delivered her of a
son, is a relevant fact.
(c) The question is whether A was in Singapore on a given day.
A statement in the diary of a deceased solicitor regularly kept in the course of
business that on a given day the solicitor attended A at a place mentioned in
Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

31

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

Singapore for the purpose of conferring with him upon specified business is a
relevant fact.
(d) The question is whether a ship sailed from Singapore harbour on a given
day.
A letter written by a deceased member of a merchants firm by which she was
chartered to their correspondents in London, to whom the cargo was consigned,
stating that the ship sailed on a given day from Singapore harbour is a relevant fact.
(e) The question is whether rent was paid to A for certain land.
A letter from As deceased agent to B, saying that he had received the rent on
As account and held it at As orders, is a relevant fact.
(f) The question is whether A and B were legally married.
The statement of a deceased clergyman that he married them under such
circumstances that the celebration would be a crime is relevant.
(g) The question is whether A, a person who cannot be found, wrote a letter on
a certain day.
The fact that a letter written by him is dated on that day is relevant.
(h) The question is, what was the cause of the wreck of a ship?
A protest made by the captain, whose attendance cannot be procured, is a
relevant fact.
(i) The question is, what was the price of shares on a certain day in a particular
market?
A statement of the price made by a deceased broker in the ordinary course of
his business is a relevant fact.
(j) The question is whether A, who is dead, was the father of B.
A statement by A that B was his son is a relevant fact.
(k) The question is, what was the date of the birth of A?
A letter from As deceased father to a friend, announcing the birth of A on a
given day, is a relevant fact.
(l) The question is whether and when A and B were married.
An entry in a memorandum-book by C, the deceased father of B, of his
daughters marriage with A on a given date, is a relevant fact.
(m) A sues B for a libel expressed in a printed caricature exposed in a shopwindow. The question is as to the similarity of the caricature and its
libellous character.
The remarks of a crowd of spectators on these points may be proved.
Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

32

(2) For the purposes of paragraph (a), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), (h), (i) or
(j) of subsection (1), where a person makes an oral statement to or in
the hearing of another person who, at the request of the maker of the
statement, puts it (or the substance of it) into writing at the time or
reasonably soon afterwards, thereby producing a corresponding
statement in a document, the statement in the document shall be
treated for the purposes of those paragraphs as the statement of the
maker of the oral statement.
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

(3) A statement which is otherwise relevant under subsection (1)


shall not be relevant if the court is of the view that it would not be in
the interests of justice to treat it as relevant.
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

(4) Except in the case of subsection (1)(k), evidence may not be


given under subsection (1) on behalf of a party to the proceedings
unless that party complies
(a) in the case of criminal proceedings, with such notice
requirements and other conditions as may be prescribed by
the Minister under section 428 of the Criminal Procedure
Code 2010 (Act 15 of 2010); and
(b) in all other proceedings, with such notice requirements and
other conditions as may be prescribed in the Rules of Court or
the Family Justice Rules.
[Act 27 of 2014 wef 01/10/2014]

(5) Where a statement is admitted in evidence under subsection (1),


the court shall assign such weight as it deems fit to the statement.
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

(6) Notwithstanding paragraph (k) of subsection (1), an agreement


under that paragraph does not enable a statement to be given in
evidence in criminal proceedings on the prosecutions behalf unless at
the time the agreement is made, the accused or any of the co-accused
is represented by an advocate.
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

(7) Notwithstanding paragraph (k) of subsection (1), an agreement


under that paragraph shall be of no effect for the purposes of any
proceedings before the High Court or any proceedings arising out of
proceedings before the High Court if made during proceedings before
Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

33

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

an examining Magistrate conducting a committal hearing under


Division 2 of Part X of the Criminal Procedure Code 2010.
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

Protest, greeting, etc., treated as stating fact that utterance


implies
32A. For the purposes of section 32(1), a protest, greeting or other
verbal utterance may be treated as stating any fact that the utterance
implies.
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

Statement of opinion
32B.(1) Subject to this section, section 32 applies to statements of
opinion as they apply to statements of fact.
(2) A statement of opinion shall only be admissible under
section 32(1) if that statement would be admissible in those
proceedings if made through direct oral evidence.
(3) Where a person is called as a witness in any proceedings, a
statement of opinion by him on a relevant matter on which he is not
qualified to give expert evidence, if made as a way of conveying
relevant facts personally perceived by him, is admissible as evidence
of what he perceived.
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

Admissibility of evidence as to credibility of maker, etc., of


statement admitted under certain provisions
32C.(1) Where in any proceedings a statement made by a person
who is not called as a witness in those proceedings is given in
evidence by virtue of section 32(1)
(a) any evidence which, if that person had been so called, would
be admissible for the purpose of undermining or supporting
that persons credibility as a witness, is admissible for that
purpose in those proceedings; and
(b) as regards any matter which, if that person had been so called,
could have been put to him in cross-examination for the
purpose of undermining his credibility as a witness, being a
matter of which, if he had denied it, evidence could not have
Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

34

been adduced by the cross-examining party, evidence of that


matter may with the leave of the court be given for that
purpose.
(2) Where in any proceedings a statement made by a person who is
not called as a witness in those proceedings is given in evidence by
virtue of section 32(1), evidence tending to prove that, whether before
or after he made that statement, he made another statement (orally,
written or otherwise) inconsistent with the first-mentioned statement
is admissible for the purpose of showing that he has contradicted
himself.
(3) For the purposes of section 32(1)(b), subsections (1) and (2)
apply in relation to both the maker of the statement and the person
who originally supplied the information from which the statement was
made.
(4) Section 32(2) applies for the purposes of this section as it applies
for the purposes of section 32(1).
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

Relevancy of certain evidence for proving in subsequent


proceeding the truth of facts therein stated
33. Evidence given by a witness in a judicial proceeding, or before
any person authorised by law to take it, is relevant for the purpose of
proving in a subsequent judicial proceeding, or in a later stage of the
same judicial proceeding, the truth of the facts which it states, when
the witness is dead or cannot be found or is incapable of giving
evidence, or is kept out of the way by the adverse party, or if his
presence cannot be obtained without an amount of delay or expense
which under the circumstances of the case the court considers
unreasonable subject to the following provisions:
(a) the proceeding was between the same parties or their
representatives in interest;
(b) the adverse party in the first proceeding had the right and
opportunity to cross-examine; and
(c) the questions in issue were substantially the same in the first
as in the second proceeding.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

35

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

Explanation A criminal trial or inquiry shall be deemed to be a proceeding


between the prosecutor and the accused within the meaning of this section.

Statements made under special circumstances


Entries in books of accounts when relevant
34. Entries in books of accounts regularly kept in the course of
business are relevant whenever they refer to a matter into which the
court has to inquire, but such statements shall not alone be sufficient
evidence to charge any person with liability.
Illustration
A sues B for $1,000 and shows entries in his account-books showing B to be
indebted to him to this amount. The entries are relevant, but are not sufficient
without other evidence to prove the debt.

35. [Repealed by Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]


36. [Repealed by Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]
Rules for filing and receiving evidence and documents in court
by using information technology
36A.(1) The Rules Committee constituted under the Supreme
Court of Judicature Act (Cap. 322), and the Family Justice Rules
Committee constituted under the Family Justice Act 2014, may make
rules to provide for the filing, receiving and recording of evidence and
documents in court by the use of information technology in such form,
manner or method as may be prescribed.
[8/96]

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of subsection (1), such rules


may
(a) modify such provisions of this Act as may be necessary for
the purpose of facilitating the use of electronic filing of
documents in court;
(b) provide for the burden of proof and rebuttable presumptions
in relation to the identity and authority of the person sending
or filing the evidence or documents by the use of information
technology; and

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

36

CAP. 97

(c) provide for the authentication of evidence and documents


filed or received by the use of information technology.
[8/96]
[Act 27 of 2014 wef 01/10/2014]

Relevancy of entry in public record made in performance of


duty
37. An entry in any public or other official book, register or record,
stating a fact in issue or relevant fact and made by a public officer in
the discharge of his official duty or by any other person in
performance of a duty specially enjoined by the law of the country
in which such book, register or record is kept, is itself a relevant fact.
Relevancy of statements in maps, charts and plans
38. Statements of facts in issue or relevant facts made in published
maps or charts generally offered for public sale, or in maps or plans
made under the authority of Government as to matters usually
represented or stated in such maps, charts or plans, are themselves
relevant facts.
Relevancy of statement as to fact of public nature contained in
certain Ordinances, Acts or notifications
39. When the court has to form an opinion as to the existence of any
fact of a public nature, any statement of it made in a recital contained
in
(a) any Act or Ordinance;
(b) any legislation enacted by the Parliament of Malaysia or by
the legislature of any part of the Commonwealth;
(c) any legislation enacted by the legislature of any State of
Malaysia; or
(d) any printed paper purporting to be
(i) the Government Gazette;
(ii) the London Gazette; or
(iii) the Gazette printed under the authority of the
Government of Malaysia or of any State thereof or
Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

37

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

of the government of any other part of the


Commonwealth including, where such part is under
both a central government and a local government, any
such local government,
is a relevant fact.
Relevancy of statements as to any law contained in law books
40. When the court has to form an opinion as to a law of any country,
any statement of the law contained in a book purporting to be printed
or published under the authority of the government of the country, and
to contain any such law, and any report of a ruling of the courts of the
country contained in a book purporting to be a report of the rulings, is
relevant.
How much of a statement is to be proved
What evidence to be given when statement forms part of a
conversation, document, book or series of letters or papers
41. When any statement of which evidence is given forms part of a
longer statement or of a conversation, or part of an isolated document
or is contained in a document which forms part of a book or of a
connected series of letters or papers, evidence shall be given of so
much and no more of the statement, conversation, document, book or
series of letters or papers as the court considers necessary in that
particular case to the full understanding of the nature and effect of the
statement and of the circumstances under which it was made.
Judgments of courts of justice when relevant
Previous judgments relevant to bar a second suit or trial
42. The existence of any judgment, order or decree which by law
prevents any court from taking cognizance of a suit or holding a trial is
a relevant fact when the question is whether the court ought to take
cognizance of the suit or to hold the trial.
Relevancy of certain judgments in probate, etc., jurisdiction
43.(1) A final judgment, order or decree of a competent court, in
the exercise of probate, matrimonial, admiralty or bankruptcy
Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

38

jurisdiction, which confers upon or takes away from any person any
legal character, or which declares any person to be entitled to any such
character, or to be entitled to any specific thing, not as against any
specified person but absolutely, is relevant when the existence of any
such legal character or the title of any such person to any such thing is
relevant.
(2) Such judgment, order or decree is conclusive proof
(a) that any legal character which it confers accrued at the time
when such judgment, order or decree came into operation;
(b) that any legal character to which it declares any such person to
be entitled accrued to that person at the time when such
judgment, order or decree declares it to have accrued to that
person;
(c) that any legal character which it takes away from any such
person ceased at the time from which such judgment, order or
decree declared that it had ceased or should cease; and
(d) that anything to which it declares any person to be so entitled
was the property of that person at the time from which such
judgment, order or decree declares that it had been or should
be his property.
Relevancy and effect of judgments, orders or decrees other than
those mentioned in section 43
44. Judgments, orders or decrees other than those mentioned in
section 43 are relevant if they relate to matters of a public nature
relevant to the inquiry; but such judgments, orders or decrees are not
conclusive proof of that which they state.
Illustration
A sues B for trespass on his land. B alleges the existence of a public right of
way over the land which A denies.
The existence of a decree in favour of the defendant in a suit by A against C for
a trespass on the same land in which C alleged the existence of the same right of
way is relevant, but it is not conclusive proof that the right of way exists.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

39

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

Judgments, etc., other than those mentioned in sections 42 to 44


when relevant
45. Judgments, orders or decrees other than those mentioned in
sections 42, 43 and 44 are irrelevant unless the existence of such
judgment, order or decree is a fact in issue or is relevant under some
other provision of this Act.
Illustrations
(a) A and B separately sue C for a libel which reflects upon each of them. C in
each case says that the matter alleged to be libellous is true, and the
circumstances are such that it is probably true in each case or in neither.
A obtains a decree against C for damages on the ground that C failed to make
out his justification. The fact is irrelevant as between B and C.
(b) A prosecutes B under section 498 of the Penal Code for enticing away C,
As wife.
B denies that C is As wife, but the court convicts B.
Afterwards C is prosecuted for bigamy in marrying B during As lifetime. C
says that she never was As wife.
The judgment against B is irrelevant as against C.
(c) A has obtained a decree for the possession of land against B. C, Bs son,
murders A in consequence.
The existence of the judgment is relevant as showing motive for a crime.
(d) A is charged with theft and with having been previously convicted of theft.
The previous conviction is relevant as a fact in issue.
(e) A is tried for the murder of B. The fact that B prosecuted A for libel and that
A was convicted and sentenced is relevant under section 8 as showing the
motive for the fact in issue.

Relevance of convictions and acquittals


45A.(1) Without prejudice to sections 42, 43, 44 and 45, the fact
that a person has been convicted or acquitted of an offence by or
before any court in Singapore shall be admissible in evidence for the
purpose of proving, where relevant to any issue in the proceedings,
that he committed (or, as the case may be, did not commit) that
offence, whether or not he is a party to the proceedings; and where he

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

40

was convicted, whether he was so convicted upon a plea of guilty or


otherwise.
[8/96]

(2) A conviction referred to in subsection (1) is relevant and


admissible unless
(a) it is subject to review or appeal that has not yet been
determined;
(b) it has been quashed or set aside; or
(c) a pardon has been given in respect of it.
[8/96]

(3) A person proved to have been convicted of an offence under this


section shall, unless the contrary is proved, be taken to have
committed the acts and to have possessed the state of mind (if any)
which at law constitute that offence.
[8/96]

(4) Any conviction or acquittal admissible under this section may be


proved by a certificate of conviction or acquittal, signed by the
Registrar of the Supreme Court, the registrar of the State Courts or the
registrar of the Family Justice Courts, as the case may be, giving the
substance and effect of the charge and of the conviction or acquittal.
[8/96]
[Act 5 of 2014 wef 07/03/2014]
[Act 27 of 2014 wef 01/10/2014]

(5) Where relevant, any document containing details of the


information, complaint, charge, agreed statement of facts or record
of proceedings on which the person in question is convicted shall be
admissible in evidence.
[8/96]

(6) The method of proving a conviction or acquittal under this


section shall be in addition to any other authorised manner of proving
a conviction or acquittal.
[8/96]

(7) In any criminal proceedings, this section shall be subject to any


written law or any other rule of law to the effect that a conviction shall
not be admissible to prove a tendency or disposition on the part of the

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

41

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

accused to commit the kind of offence with which he has been


charged.
[8/96]

(8) In this section


registrar of the Family Justice Courts includes the deputy
registrar or an assistant registrar of the Family Justice Courts;
registrar of the State Courts includes a deputy registrar of the
State Courts;
Registrar of the Supreme Court includes the Deputy Registrar
or an Assistant Registrar of the Supreme Court.
[Act 27 of 2014 wef 01/10/2014]

Fraud or collusion in obtaining judgment or incompetency of


court may be proved
46. Any party to a suit or other proceeding may show that any
judgment, order or decree which is relevant under section 42, 43 or 44,
and which has been proved by the adverse party, was delivered by a
court not competent to deliver it or was obtained by fraud or collusion.
Opinions of third persons when relevant
Opinions of experts
47.(1) Subject to subsection (4), when the court is likely to derive
assistance from an opinion upon a point of scientific, technical or
other specialised knowledge, the opinions of experts upon that point
are relevant facts.
(2) An expert is a person with such scientific, technical or other
specialised knowledge based on training, study or experience.
(3) The opinion of an expert shall not be irrelevant merely because
the opinion or part thereof relates to a matter of common knowledge.
(4) An opinion which is otherwise relevant under subsection (1)
shall not be relevant if the court is of the view that it would not be in
the interests of justice to treat it as relevant.
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

42

Facts bearing upon opinions of experts


48. Facts not otherwise relevant are relevant if they support or are
inconsistent with the opinions of experts when such opinions are
relevant.
Illustrations
(a) The question is whether A was poisoned by a certain poison.
The fact that other persons who were poisoned by that poison exhibited
certain symptoms, which experts affirm or deny to be the symptoms of that poison,
is relevant.
(b) The question is whether an obstruction to a harbour is caused by a certain
sea-wall.
The fact that other harbours similarly situated in other respects but where
there were no such sea-walls began to be obstructed at about the same time is
relevant.

Opinion as to handwriting when relevant


49. When the court has to form an opinion as to the person by whom
any document was written or signed, the opinion of any person
acquainted with the handwriting of the person by whom it is supposed
to be written or signed, that it was or was not written or signed by that
person, is a relevant fact.
Explanation A person is said to be acquainted with the handwriting of
another person when he has seen that person write, or when he has received
documents purporting to be written by that person in answer to documents written
by himself or under his authority and addressed to that person, or when, in the
ordinary course of business, documents purporting to be written by that person
have been habitually submitted to him.
Illustrations
The question is whether a given letter is in the handwriting of A, a merchant in
London.
B is a merchant in Singapore, who has written letters addressed to A and
received letters purporting to be written by him. C is Bs clerk, whose duty it was to
examine and file Bs correspondence. D is Bs broker, to whom B habitually
submitted the letters purporting to be written by A, for the purpose of advising him
thereon.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

43

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

The opinions of B, C and D on the question whether the letter is in the


handwriting of A are relevant, though neither B, C nor D ever saw A write.

Opinion as to existence of right or custom when relevant


50. When the court has to form an opinion as to the existence of any
general custom or right, the opinions as to the existence of such
custom or right of persons who would be likely to know of its
existence, if it existed, are relevant.
Explanation General custom or right includes customs or rights common
to any considerable class of persons.
Illustration
The right of the inhabitants of a particular kampong to use the water of a
particular well is a general right within the meaning of this section.

Opinion as to usages, tenets, etc., when relevant


51. When the court has to form an opinion as to
(a) the usages and tenets of any body of men or family;
(b) the constitution and government of any religious or charitable
foundation; or
(c) the meaning of words or terms used in particular districts or
by particular classes of people,
the opinions of persons having special means of knowledge thereon
are relevant facts.
Opinion on relationship when relevant
52.(1) When the court has to form an opinion as to the
relationship of one person to another, the opinion expressed by
conduct as to the existence of such relationship of any person who as a
member of the family or otherwise has special means of knowledge on
the subject is a relevant fact.
(2) Such opinion shall not be sufficient to prove a marriage in
prosecutions under section 494 or 495 of the Penal Code (Cap. 224).
[51/2007 wef 01/02/2008]

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

44

Illustration
(a) The question is whether A and B were married.
The fact that they were usually received and treated by their friends as
husband and wife is relevant.
(b) The question is whether A was a legitimate son of B.
The fact that A was always treated as such by members of the family is
relevant.

Grounds of opinion when relevant


53. Whenever the opinion of any living person is relevant, the
grounds on which such opinion is based are also relevant.
Illustration
An expert may give an account of experiments performed by him for the
purpose of forming his opinion.

Character when relevant


In civil cases character to prove conduct imputed irrelevant
54. In civil cases the fact that the character of any person concerned
is such as to render probable or improbable any conduct imputed to
him is irrelevant, except in so far as such character appears from facts
otherwise relevant.
In criminal cases previous good character relevant
55. In criminal proceedings, the fact that the person accused is of a
good character is relevant.
Admissibility of evidence and questions about accuseds
disposition or reputation
56.(1) In any criminal proceedings, the accused may
(a) personally or by his advocate ask questions of any witness
with a view to establishing directly or by implication that he is
generally or in a particular respect a person of good
disposition or reputation;

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

45

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

(b) himself give evidence tending to establish directly or by


implication that he is generally or in a particular respect such a
person; or
(c) call a witness to give any such evidence.
(2) Where any of the things mentioned in subsection (1) has been
done, the prosecution may call, and any person jointly charged with
the accused may call or himself give, evidence to establish that the
accused is a person of bad disposition or reputation, and the
prosecution or any person so charged may in cross-examining any
witness (including, where he gives evidence, the accused) ask him
questions with a view to establishing that fact.
(3) Where by virtue of this section a party is entitled to call evidence
to establish that the accused is a person of bad disposition or
reputation, that party may call evidence of his previous convictions, if
any, whether or not that party calls any other evidence for that
purpose.
(4) Where by virtue of this section a party is entitled in crossexamining the accused to ask him questions with a view to
establishing that he is such a person, section 122(4) shall not apply
in relation to his cross-examination by that party.
Character as affecting damages
57. In civil cases, the fact that the character of any person is such as
to affect the amount of damages which he ought to receive is relevant.
Explanation In sections 54, 55, 56 and 57, the word character includes
both reputation and disposition; but, except as provided in section 56, evidence
may be given only of general reputation and general disposition, and not of
particular acts by which reputation or disposition are shown.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

46

PART II
PROOF
Facts which need not be proved
Fact judicially noticeable need not be proved
58. No fact of which the court will take judicial notice need be
proved.
Facts of which court must take judicial notice
59.(1) The court shall take judicial notice of the following facts:
(a) all laws or rules having the force of law now or heretofore in
force or hereafter to be in force in Singapore, including all
Acts passed or hereafter to be passed by Parliament;
(b) all Acts passed or hereafter to be passed by the legislature of
any territory within the Commonwealth;
(c) articles of war for the armed forces of Singapore or any
visiting forces lawfully present in Singapore;
(d) the course of proceedings of Parliament and of the legislature
of any territory within the Commonwealth;
(e) the election of the President and the appointment of any
person to exercise the functions of the President;
(f) all seals of which English courts take judicial notice, the seals
of all the courts in Singapore, the seals of notaries public, and
all seals which any person is authorised to use by any law in
force for the time being in Singapore;
(g) the appointment, accession to office, names, titles, functions
and signatures of the persons filling for the time being any
public office in Singapore, if the fact of their appointment to
such office is notified in the Gazette;
(h) the existence, title and national flag of every State or
Sovereign recognised by the Government;
(i) the ordinary course of nature, natural and artificial divisions
of time, the geographical divisions of the world, the meaning

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

47

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

of English words, and public festivals, fasts and holidays


notified in the Gazette;
(j) the territories in the Commonwealth;
(k) the commencement, continuance and termination of
hostilities between Singapore or any other part of the
Commonwealth and any other country or body of persons;
(l) the names of the members and officers of the court and of
their deputies and subordinate officers and assistants, and also
of all officers acting in execution of its process, and of all
advocates and solicitors and other persons authorised by law
to appear or act before it;
(m) the rule of the road on land or at sea;
(n) all other matters which it is directed by any written law to
notice.
[7/97]

(2) In all these cases, and also on all matters of public history,
literature, science or art, the court may resort for its aid to appropriate
books or documents of reference.
(3) If the court is called upon by any person to take judicial notice of
any fact, the court may refuse to do so unless such person produces
any such book or document as it considers necessary to enable it to do
so.
Facts admitted need not be proved
60.(1) No fact need be proved in any proceeding which the parties
thereto or their agents agree to admit at the hearing or which before the
hearing they agree to admit by any writing under their hands, or which
by any rule of pleading in force at the time they are deemed to have
admitted by their pleadings.
(2) The court may, in its discretion, require the facts admitted to be
proved otherwise than by such admissions.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

48

Oral evidence
Proof of facts by oral evidence
61. All facts, except the contents of documents, may be proved by
oral evidence.
Oral evidence must be direct
62.(1) Oral evidence must in all cases whatever be direct
(a) if it refers to a fact which could be seen, it must be the
evidence of a witness who says he saw that fact;
(b) if it refers to a fact which could be heard, it must be the
evidence of a witness who says he heard that fact;
(c) if it refers to a fact which could be perceived by any other
sense or in any other manner, it must be the evidence of a
witness who says he perceived that fact by that sense or in that
manner;
(d) if it refers to an opinion or to the grounds on which that
opinion is held, it must be the evidence of the person who
holds that opinion on those grounds.
(2) The opinions of experts expressed in any treatise commonly
offered for sale and the grounds on which such opinions are held may
be proved by the production of such treatise if the author is dead or
cannot be found or has become incapable of giving evidence or cannot
be called as a witness without an amount of delay or expense which
the court regards as unreasonable.
(3) If oral evidence refers to the existence or condition of any
material thing other than a document, the court may, if it thinks fit,
require the production of such material thing for its inspection.
Evidence through live video or live television links
62A.(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, a
person may, with leave of the court, give evidence through a live video
or live television link in any proceedings, other than proceedings in a
criminal matter, if
(a) the witness is below the age of 16 years;
Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

49

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

(b) it is expressly agreed between the parties to the proceedings


that evidence may be so given;
(c) the witness is outside Singapore; or
(d) the court is satisfied that it is expedient in the interests of
justice to do so.
[8/96]

(2) In considering whether to grant leave for a witness outside


Singapore to give evidence by live video or live television link under
this section, the court shall have regard to all the circumstances of the
case including the following:
(a) the reasons for the witness being unable to give evidence in
Singapore;
(b) the administrative and technical facilities and arrangements
made at the place where the witness is to give his evidence;
and
(c) whether any party to the proceedings would be unfairly
prejudiced.
[8/96]

(3) The court may, in granting leave under subsection (1), make an
order on all or any of the following matters:
(a) the persons who may be present at the place where the witness
is giving evidence;
(b) that a person be excluded from the place while the witness is
giving evidence;
(c) the persons in the courtroom who must be able to be heard, or
seen and heard, by the witness and by the persons with the
witness;
(d) the persons in the courtroom who must not be able to be
heard, or seen and heard, by the witness and by the persons
with the witness;
(e) the persons in the courtroom who must be able to see and hear
the witness and the persons with the witness;

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

50

(f) the stages in the proceedings during which a specified part of


the order is to have effect;
(g) the method of operation of the live video or live television
link system including compliance with such minimum
technical standards as may be determined by the Chief
Justice; and
(h) any other order the court considers necessary in the interests
of justice.
[8/96]

(4) The court may revoke, suspend or vary an order made under this
section if
(a) the live video or live television link system stops working and
it would cause unreasonable delay to wait until a working
system becomes available;
(b) it is necessary for the court to do so to comply with its duty to
ensure that the proceedings are conducted fairly to the parties
thereto;
(c) it is necessary for the court to do so, so that the witness can
identify a person or a thing or so that the witness can
participate in or view a demonstration or an experiment;
(d) it is necessary for the court to do so because part of the
proceedings is being heard outside a courtroom; or
(e) there has been a material change in the circumstances after the
court has made an order.
[8/96]

(5) The court shall not make an order under this section, or include a
particular provision in such an order, if to do so would be inconsistent
with the courts duty to ensure that the proceedings are conducted
fairly to the parties to the proceedings.
[8/96]

(6) An order made under this section shall not cease to have effect
merely because the person in respect of whom it was made attains the
age of 16 years before the proceedings in which it was made are
finally determined.
[8/96]

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

51

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

(7) Evidence given by a witness, whether in Singapore or elsewhere,


through a live video or live television link by virtue of this section
shall be deemed for the purposes of sections 193, 194, 195, 196, 205
and 209 of the Penal Code (Cap. 224) as having been given in the
proceedings in which it is given.
[8/96]

(8) Where a witness gives evidence in accordance with this section,


he shall, for the purposes of this Act, be deemed to be giving evidence
in the presence of the court.
[8/96]

(9) The Rules Committee constituted under the Supreme Court of


Judicature Act (Cap. 322), and the Family Justice Rules Committee
constituted under the Family Justice Act 2014, may make such rules
as appear to it to be necessary or expedient for the purpose of giving
effect to this section and for prescribing anything which may be
prescribed under this section.
[8/96]
[Act 27 of 2014 wef 01/10/2014]

Documentary evidence
Proof of contents of documents
63. The contents of documents may be proved by primary or by
secondary evidence.
Primary evidence
64. Primary evidence means the document itself produced for the
inspection of the court.
Explanation 1.Where a document is executed in several parts, each part is
primary evidence of the document.
Where a document is executed in counterpart, each counterpart being executed by
one or some of the parties only, each counterpart is primary evidence as against the
parties executing it.
Explanation 2.Where a number of documents are all made by one uniform
process, as in the case of printing, lithography or photography, each is primary
evidence of the contents of the rest; but where they are all copies of a common
original they are not primary evidence of the contents of the original.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

Evidence

1997 Ed.

CAP. 97

52

Illustration
A person is shown to have been in possession of a number of placards, all
printed at one time from one original. Any one of the placards is primary evidence
of the contents of any other, but no one of them is primary evidence of the contents
of the original.
Explanation 3.Notwithstanding 2, if a copy of a document in the form of an
electronic record is shown to reflect that document accurately, then the copy is
primary evidence.
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

Illustrations
(a) An electronic record, which has been manifestly or consistently acted on,
relied upon, or used as the information recorded or stored on the computer
system (the document), is primary evidence of that document.
(b) If the electronic record has not been manifestly or consistently acted on,
relied upon, or used as a record of the information in the document, the
electronic record may be a copy of the document and treated as secondary
evidence of that document.
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

Secondary evidence
65. Secondary evidence means and includes
(a) certified copies given under the provisions hereinafter
contained;
(b) except for copies referred to in Explanation 3 to section 64,
copies made from the original by electronic, electrochemical,
chemical, magnetic, mechanical, optical, telematic or other
technical processes, which in themselves ensure the accuracy
of the copy, and copies compared with such copies;
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

(c) copies made from or compared with the original;


(d) counterparts of documents as against the parties who did not
execute them;
(e) oral accounts of the contents of a document given by some
person who has himself seen it.
[8/96]

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

53

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

Illustrations
(a) A photograph of an original is secondary evidence of its contents, though
the 2 have not been compared, if it is proved that the thing photographed
was the original.
(b) A copy compared with a copy of a letter made by a copying machine is
secondary evidence of the contents of the letter if it is shown that the copy
made by the copying machine was made from the original.
(c) [Deleted by Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]
(d) A copy transcribed from a copy but afterwards compared with the original
is secondary evidence, but the copy not so compared is not secondary
evidence of the original, although the copy from which it was transcribed
was compared with the original.
(e) Neither an oral account of a copy compared with the original nor an oral
account of a photograph or machine-copy of the original is secondary
evidence of the original.
[8/96]

Proof of documents by primary evidence


66. Documents must be proved by primary evidence except in the
cases mentioned in section 67.
Cases in which secondary evidence relating to documents may
be given
67.(1) Secondary evidence may be given of the existence,
condition or contents of a document admissible in evidence in the
following cases:
(a) when the original is shown or appears to be in the possession
or power of
(i) the person against whom the document is sought to be
proved;
(ii) any person out of reach of or not subject to the process
of the court; or
(iii) any person legally bound to produce it,
and when, after the notice mentioned in section 68, such
person does not produce it;

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

54

(b) when the existence, condition or contents of the original have


been proved to be admitted in writing by the person against
whom it is proved or by his representative in interest;
(c) when the original has been destroyed or lost, or when the
party offering evidence of its contents cannot for any other
reason not arising from his own default or neglect produce it
in reasonable time;
(d) when the original is of such a nature as not to be easily
movable;
(e) when the original is a public document within the meaning of
section 76;
(f) when the original is a document of which a certified copy is
permitted by this Act or by any other law in force for the time
being in Singapore to be given in evidence;
(g) when the originals consist of numerous accounts or other
documents which cannot conveniently be examined in court,
and the fact to be proved is the general result of the whole
collection.
(2) In cases (a), (c) and (d), any secondary evidence of the contents
of the document is admissible.
(3) In case (b), the written admission is admissible.
(4) In case (e) or (f), a certified copy of the document but no other
kind of secondary evidence is admissible.
(5) In case (g), evidence may be given as to the general result of the
documents by any person who has examined them and who is skilled
in the examination of such documents.
Proof of documents in certain cases
67A. Where in any proceedings a statement in a document is
admissible in evidence by virtue of section 32(1), it may be proved by
the production of that document or (whether or not that document is
still in existence) by the production of a copy of that document, or of

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

55

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

the material part of it, authenticated in a manner approved by the


court.
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

Rules as to notice to produce


68.(1) Secondary evidence of the contents of the documents
referred to in section 67(1)(a) shall not be given unless the party
proposing to give such secondary evidence has previously given to the
party in whose possession or power the document is, or to his solicitor,
such notice to produce it as is prescribed by law; and if no notice is
prescribed by law, then such notice as the court considers reasonable
under the circumstances of the case.
(2) The notice mentioned in subsection (1) shall not be required in
order to render secondary evidence admissible in any of the following
cases or in any other case in which the court thinks fit to dispense with
it:
(a) when the document to be proved is itself a notice;
(b) when from the nature of the case the adverse party must know
that he will be required to produce it;
(c) when it appears or is proved that the adverse party has
obtained possession of the original by fraud or force;
(d) when the adverse party or his agent has the original in court;
(e) when the adverse party or his agent has admitted the loss of
the document;
(f) when the person in possession of the document is out of reach
of or not subject to the process of the court.
Manner of giving voluminous or complex evidence
68A.(1) Evidence may be given in the form of charts, summaries
or other explanatory material, in electronic or other medium, if it
appears to the court that
(a) the materials would be likely to aid the courts comprehension
of other evidence which is relevant and admissible according
to the provisions of this Act or any other written law; and

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

56

CAP. 97

(b) the evidence that is to be given by any party is so voluminous


or complex that the court considers it convenient to assess the
evidence by reference to such materials.
[8/96]
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

(2) Any fact or opinion asserted in any material referred to in


subsection (1) shall be proved by relevant and admissible evidence,
and if such fact or opinion is one that is admissible only on the proof of
some other fact or opinion, such last-mentioned fact or opinion must
be proved before evidence is given of the fact or opinion firstmentioned, unless the party undertakes to give proof of such fact or
opinion and the court is satisfied with such undertaking.
[8/96]

(3) In any proceedings where any material referred to in


subsection (1) is adduced in evidence, the court may
(a) direct the party to provide such material in electronic or other
medium;
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

(b) require the provision of such material or copy thereof,


including the identity and address of the person who prepared
the material, to the other parties; and
(c) specify a period within which such material or copy thereof
must be provided to all parties to the proceedings.
[8/96]

Proof of signature and handwriting of person alleged to have


signed or written document produced
69.(1) If a document is alleged to be signed or to have been
written wholly or in part by any person, the signature or the
handwriting of so much of the document as is alleged to be in that
persons handwriting must be proved to be in his handwriting.
[Act 25/98 wef 10/07/98]

(2) This section shall not apply to any electronic record or electronic
signature to which the Electronic Transactions Act 1998 applies.
[Act 25/98 wef 10/07/98]

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

57

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

Proof of execution of document required by law to be attested


70. If a document is required by law to be attested, it shall not be
used as evidence until one attesting witness at least has been called for
the purpose of proving its execution, if there is an attesting witness
alive and subject to the process of the court and capable of giving
evidence.
Proof where no attesting witness found
71. If no such attesting witness can be found, or if the document
purports to have been executed in the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Northern Ireland, it must be proved that the attestation of
one attesting witness at least is in his handwriting, and that the
signature of the person executing the document is in the handwriting
of that person.
Admission of execution by party to attested document
72. The admission of a party to an attested document of its execution
by himself shall be sufficient proof of its execution as against him,
though it is a document required by law to be attested.
Proof when attesting witness denies the execution
73. If the attesting witness denies or does not recollect the execution
of the document, its execution may be proved by other evidence.
Proof of document not required by law to be attested
74. An attested document not required by law to be attested may be
proved as if it was unattested.
Comparison of signature, writing or seal with others admitted
or proved
75.(1) In order to ascertain whether a signature, writing or seal is
that of the person by whom it purports to have been written or made,
any signature, writing or seal, admitted or proved to the satisfaction of
the court to have been written or made by that person, may be
compared by a witness or by the court with the one which is to be
proved, although that signature, writing or seal has not been produced
or proved for any other purpose.
Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

Evidence

1997 Ed.

CAP. 97

58

(2) The court may direct any person present in court to write any
words or figures for the purpose of enabling the court to compare the
words or figures so written with any words or figures alleged to have
been written by such person.
(3) This section shall apply also, with any necessary modifications,
to finger impressions.
Public documents
Public documents
76. The following documents are public documents:
(a) documents forming the acts or records of the acts of
(i) the sovereign authority;
(ii) official bodies and tribunals; and
(iii) public officers, legislative, judicial and executive,
whether of Singapore or of any part of the
Commonwealth or of a foreign country;
(b) public records kept in Singapore of private documents.
Private documents
77. All other documents are private.
Certified copies of public documents
78.(1) Every public officer having the custody of a public
document which any person has a right to inspect shall give that
person on demand a copy of it on payment of the legal fees therefor,
together with a certificate, written at the foot of such copy, that it is a
true copy of such document or part thereof, as the case may be.
(2) A certificate under subsection (1) shall be dated and subscribed
by such officer with his name and his official title, and shall be sealed
whenever such officer is authorised by law to make use of a seal, and
such copies so certified shall be called certified copies.
Explanation Any officer who by the ordinary course of official duty is
authorised to deliver such copies shall be deemed to have the custody of such
documents within the meaning of this section.
Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

59

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

Proof of documents by production of certified copies


79. Such certified copies may be produced in proof of the contents
of the public documents or parts of the public documents of which
they purport to be copies.
Proof of other official documents
80.(1) The following public documents may be proved as
follows:
(a) the Acts, orders or notifications of the Government in any of
its departments
by the records of the departments certified by the heads of
those departments or by a Minister or by any document
purporting to be printed by the authority of the Government;
(b) the proceedings of Parliament
by the minutes of Parliament or by published Acts or
abstracts or by copies purporting to be printed by the
authority of the Government;
(c) the Acts, orders or notifications of the Government of
Malaysia or the proceedings of the Parliament of Malaysia
by copies or extracts contained in the Government Gazette
of Malaysia or by the recognition thereof in any Act or
Ordinance of Malaysia or any State thereof;
(d) proclamations, orders or regulations issued by Her Majesty or
by the Privy Council or by any department of Her Majestys
Government
by copies or extracts contained in the London Gazette or the
Gazette;
(e) the Acts of the Executive or the proceedings of the legislature
of a foreign country
by journals published by their authority or commonly
received in that country as such, or by a copy certified under
the seal of the country or sovereign, or by a recognition
thereof in some public Act of Singapore;

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

60

(f) the proceedings of a municipal body, town board or other


local authority in Malaysia
by a copy of such proceedings certified by the legal keeper
thereof, or by a printed book purporting to be published by
the authority of such body;
(g) public documents of any other class in a foreign country
by the original or by a copy certified by the legal keeper
thereof, with a certificate under the seal of a notary public or
of a consular officer of Singapore that the copy is duly
certified by the officer having the legal custody of the
original and upon proof of the character of the document
according to the law of the foreign country.
(2) Copies of Acts, Ordinances and Statutes passed by the
legislature of any territory in the Commonwealth and of orders,
regulations and other instruments issued or made under the authority
of any such Act, Ordinance or Statute, if purporting to be printed by
the Government Printer, shall be received in evidence by all courts in
Singapore without any proof being given that the copies were so
printed.
(3) In this section, Government Printer means, as respects any
territory in the Commonwealth, the printer purporting to be the printer
authorised to print the Acts, Ordinances or Statutes of the legislature
of that territory, or otherwise to be the Government Printer of that
territory.
Prints from films in the possession of the Government and
statutory body
80A.(1) A print, whether enlarged or not, purporting to be made
from a film of any document in the possession of the Government or
any statutory body specified in the Schedule may be produced in proof
of the contents of the document or such part of the document to which
the print purports to be a copy upon proof that
(a) while the document was in the custody or control of the
Government or specified statutory body the film was taken in
order to keep a permanent record thereof; and

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

61

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

(b) the document photographed


(i) was subsequently destroyed, whether deliberately or
otherwise;
(ii) was so damaged as to be wholly or partly
indecipherable;
(iii) was lost; or
(iv) had passed out of the custody or control of the
Government or specified statutory body.
(2) Proof
(a) that a print is made from a film of a document in the
possession of the Government or a specified statutory body;
and
(b) of compliance with the conditions in subsection (1),
may be given in respect of any document or groups of documents by a
public officer or by an employee of the specified statutory body
having custody or control of the film, orally or by a certificate
purporting to be signed by such public officer or employee.
(3) A certificate under subsection (2) shall be admissible in evidence
in any proceedings before any court on its production without further
proof.
(4) On the production of a certificate under subsection (3), the court
before which it is produced shall, until the contrary is proved,
presume
(a) that the facts stated in the certificate relating to the print and
the compliance with the conditions in subsection (1) are true;
and
(b) that the certificate purporting to be signed by a public officer
or an employee of a specified statutory body has been signed
by him.
(5) In this section
film includes a photographic plate, microfilm and photostatic
negative;

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

62

specified statutory body means a statutory body specified in


the Schedule.
(6) The Minister may, by order published in the Gazette, amend
the Schedule.
Presumptions as to documents
Presumption as to genuineness of certified copies
81.(1) The court shall presume to be genuine every document
purporting to be a certificate, certified copy or other document which
is by law declared to be admissible as evidence of any particular fact,
and which purports to be duly certified by any public officer in
Singapore or any officer in Malaysia who is duly authorised thereto, if
such document is substantially in the form and purports to be executed
in the manner directed by law in that behalf.
(2) The court shall also presume that any officer by whom any such
document purports to be signed or certified held, when he signed it,
the official character which he claims in such document.
Presumption as to documents produced as record of evidence
82. Whenever any document is produced before any court
purporting to be a record or memorandum of the evidence or of any
part of the evidence given by a witness in a judicial proceeding or
before any officer authorised by law to take such evidence, or to be a
statement or confession by any prisoner or accused person, taken in
accordance with law and purporting to be signed by any Judge or
Magistrate or by any such authorised officer, the court shall
presume
(a) that the document is genuine;
(b) that any statements as to the circumstances under which it was
taken, purporting to be made by the person signing it, are true;
and
(c) that such evidence, statement or confession was duly taken.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

63

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

Presumption as to Gazettes, newspapers and other documents


83. * The court shall presume the genuineness of every document
purporting to be the Government Gazette of Singapore or the
Government Gazette of Malaysia or of any part of the
Commonwealth, or to be the Gazette issued by the local
government of any part of Malaysia or of the Commonwealth, or to
be a newspaper or journal and of every document purporting to be a
document directed by any law to be kept by any person, if such
document is kept substantially in the form required by law and is
produced from proper custody.
Presumption as to document admissible in England without
proof of seal or signature
84. When any document is produced before any court purporting to
be a document which by the law in force for the time being in England
or Northern Ireland would be admissible in proof of any particular in
any court of justice in England or Northern Ireland, without proof of
the seal or stamp or signature authenticating it, or of the judicial or
official character claimed by the person by whom it purports to be
signed
(a) the court shall presume that such seal, stamp or signature is
genuine, and that the person signing it held at the time when
he signed it the judicial or official character which he claims;
and
(b) the document shall be admissible for the same purpose for
which it would be admissible in England or Northern Ireland.
Presumption as to maps or plans made by authority of
Government
85.(1) The court shall presume that maps or plans purporting to
be made by the authority of the Government were so made and are
accurate.
(2) Maps or plans made for the purposes of any cause or other
proceeding, civil or criminal, must be proved to be accurate.
*See also section 48 of the Interpretation Act (Cap. 1) and the explanation appended to section 92 of this Act.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

64

Presumption as to collections of laws and reports of decisions


86. The court shall presume the genuineness of every book
purporting
(a) to be printed or published under the authority of the
government of any country and to contain any of the laws
of that country; or
(b) to contain reports of decisions of the courts of such country.
Presumption as to powers of attorney
87. The court shall presume that every document purporting to be a
power of attorney, and to have been executed before and authenticated
by a notary public or any court, Judge, Magistrate or consular officer
of Singapore, was so executed and authenticated.
Presumption as to certified copies of foreign judicial records
88. The court may presume that any document purporting to be a
certified copy of any judicial record of any country not forming part of
the Commonwealth is genuine and accurate if the document purports
to be certified in any manner which is certified by any representative
of the President or of Her Britannic Majesty in or for such country to
be the manner commonly in use in that country for the certification of
copies of judicial records.
Presumption as to books, maps and charts
89. The court may presume that any book to which it may refer for
information on matters of public or general interest, and that any
published map or chart the statements of which are relevant facts and
which is produced for its inspection, was written and published by the
person and at the time and place by whom or at which it purports to
have been written or published.
Presumption as to telegraphic messages
90. The court may presume that a message forwarded from a
telegraph office to the person to whom such message purports to be
addressed corresponds with a message delivered for transmission at
the office from which the message purports to be sent; but the court
Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

65

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

shall not make any presumption as to the person by whom such


message was delivered for transmission.
Presumption as to due execution, etc., of documents not
produced
91. The court shall presume that every document called for and not
produced, after notice to produce given under section 68, was attested,
stamped and executed in the manner required by law.
Presumption as to documents 30 years old
92. Where any document purporting or proved to be 30 years old is
produced from any custody which the court in the particular case
considers proper, the court may presume that the signature and every
other part of such document which purports to be in the handwriting of
any particular person is in that persons handwriting, and in the case of
a document executed or attested, that it was duly executed and attested
by the persons by whom it purports to be executed and attested.
Explanation Documents are said to be in proper custody if they are in the
place in which and under the care of the person with whom they would naturally
be; but no custody is improper if it is proved to have had a legitimate origin, or if
the circumstances of the particular case are such as to render such an origin
probable.
This explanation applies also to section 83.
Illustrations
(a) A has been in possession of landed property for a long time. He produces
from his custody deeds relating to the land, showing his titles to it. The
custody is proper.
(b) A produces deeds relating to landed property of which he is the mortgagee.
The mortgagor is in possession. The custody is proper.
(c) A, a connection of B, produces deeds relating to lands in Bs possession,
which were deposited with him by B for safe custody. The custody is
proper.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

66

Exclusion of oral by documentary evidence


Evidence of terms of contracts, grants and other dispositions of
property reduced to form of document
93. When the terms of a contract or of a grant or of any other
disposition of property have been reduced by or by consent of the
parties to the form of a document, and in all cases in which any matter
is required by law to be reduced to the form of a document, no
evidence shall be given in proof of the terms of such contract, grant or
other disposition of property or of such matter except the document
itself, or secondary evidence of its contents in cases in which
secondary evidence is admissible under the provisions of this Act.
Exception 1.When a public officer is required by law to be appointed in
writing, and when it is shown that any particular person has acted as such officer,
the writing by which he is appointed need not be proved.
Exception 2.Wills admitted to probate in Singapore may be proved by the
probate.
Explanation 1.This section applies equally to cases in which the contracts,
grants or dispositions of property referred to are contained in one document, and to
cases in which they are contained in more documents than one.
Explanation 2.Where there are more originals than one, one original only
need be proved.
Explanation 3.The statement in any document whatever of a fact, other than
the facts referred to in this section, shall not preclude the admission of oral
evidence as to the same fact.
Illustrations
(a) If a contract is contained in several letters, all the letters in which it is
contained must be proved.
(b) If a contract is contained in a bill of exchange, the bill of exchange must be
proved.
(c) If a bill of exchange is drawn in a set of 3, one only need be proved.
(d) A contracts in writing with B for the delivery of pepper upon certain terms.
The contract mentions the fact that B had paid A the price of other pepper
contracted for verbally on another occasion.
Oral evidence is offered that no payment was made for the other pepper. The
evidence is admissible.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

67

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

(e) A gives B a receipt for money paid by B.


Oral evidence is offered of the payment. The evidence is admissible.

Exclusion of evidence of oral agreement


94. When the terms of any such contract, grant or other disposition
of property, or any matter required by law to be reduced to the form of
a document, have been proved according to section 93, no evidence of
any oral agreement or statement shall be admitted as between the
parties to any such instrument or their representatives in interest for
the purpose of contradicting, varying, adding to, or subtracting from
its terms subject to the following provisions:
(a) any fact may be proved which would invalidate any document
or which would entitle any person to any decree or order
relating thereto; such as fraud, intimidation, illegality, want of
due execution, want of capacity in any contracting party, the
fact that it is wrongly dated, want or failure of consideration,
or mistake in fact or law;
(b) the existence of any separate oral agreement, as to any matter
on which a document is silent and which is not inconsistent
with its terms, may be proved; in considering whether or not
this proviso applies, the court shall have regard to the degree
of formality of the document;
(c) the existence of any separate oral agreement constituting a
condition precedent to the attaching of any obligation under
any such contract, grant or disposition of property, may be
proved;
(d) the existence of any distinct subsequent oral agreement, to
rescind or modify any such contract, grant or disposition of
property, may be proved except in cases in which such
contract, grant or disposition of property is by law required to
be in writing, or has been registered according to the law in
force for the time being as to the registration of documents;
(e) any usage or custom by which incidents not expressly
mentioned in any contract are usually annexed to contracts
of that description may be proved; except that the annexing of

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

68

such incident would not be repugnant to or inconsistent with


the express terms of the contract;
(f) any fact may be proved which shows in what manner the
language of a document is related to existing facts.
Illustrations
(a) A policy of insurance is effected on goods in ships from Singapore to
London. The goods are shipped in a particular ship, which is lost. The fact
that that particular ship was orally excepted from the policy cannot be
proved.
(b) A agrees absolutely in writing to pay B $1,000 on 1st March 1893. The fact
that at the same time an oral agreement was made that the money should
not be paid till 31st March cannot be proved.
(c) An estate called the Kranji Estate is sold by a deed which contains a map
of the property sold. The fact that land not included in the map had always
been regarded as part of the estate and was meant to pass by the deed
cannot be proved.
(d) A enters into a written contract with B to work certain mines, the property
of B, upon certain terms. A was induced to do so by a misrepresentation of
B as to their value. This fact may be proved.
(e) A institutes a suit against B for the specific performance of a contract, and
also prays that the contract may be performed as to one of its provisions on
the ground that that provision was inserted in it by mistake. A may prove
that such a mistake was made as would by law entitle him to have the
contract performed.
(f) A orders goods of B by a letter in which nothing is said as to the time of
payment, and accepts the goods on delivery. B sues A for the price. A may
show that the goods were supplied on credit for a term still unexpired.
(g) A sells B a horse and verbally warrants him sound. A gives B a paper in
these words: Bought of A a horse for $300. B may prove the verbal
warranty.
(h) A hires lodgings of B and gives B a card on which is written: Rooms $80 a
month. A may prove a verbal agreement that these terms were to include
partial board.
A hires lodgings of B for a year, and a regularly stamped agreement drawn up
by an attorney is made between them. It is silent on the subject of board. A may not
prove that board was included in the terms verbally.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

69

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

(i) A applies to B for a debt due to A by sending a receipt for the money. B
keeps the receipt and does not send the money. In a suit for the amount A
may prove this.
(j) A and B make a contract in writing to take effect upon the happening of a
certain contingency. The writing is left with B, who sues A upon it. A may
show the circumstances under which it was delivered.

Exclusion of evidence to explain or amend ambiguous


document
95. When the language used in a document is on its face ambiguous
or defective, evidence may not be given of facts which would show its
meaning or supply its defects.
Illustrations
(a) A agrees in writing to sell a horse to B for $500 or $600. Evidence cannot
be given to show which price was to be given.
(b) A deed contains blanks. Evidence cannot be given of facts which would
show how they were meant to be filled.

Exclusion of evidence against application of document to


existing facts
96. When language used in a document is plain in itself and when it
applies accurately to existing facts, evidence may not be given to
show that it was not meant to apply to such facts.
Illustration
A conveys to B by deed my estate at Kranji containing 100 hectares. A has
an estate at Kranji containing 100 hectares. Evidence may not be given of the fact
that the estate meant was one situated at a different place and of a different size.

Evidence as to document meaningless in reference to existing


facts
97. When language used in a document is plain in itself, but is
meaningless in reference to existing facts, evidence may be given to
show that it was used in a peculiar sense.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

70

Illustration
A conveys to B by deed my plantation in Penang.
A had no plantation in Penang, but it appears that he had a plantation in
Province Wellesley, of which B had been in possession since the execution of the
deed.
These facts may be proved to show that the deed related to the plantation in
Province Wellesley.

Evidence as to application of language which can apply to one


only of several persons
98. When the facts are such that the language used might have been
meant to apply to any one, and could not have been meant to apply to
more than one of several persons or things, evidence may be given of
facts which show to which of those persons or things it was intended
to apply.
Illustrations
(a) A agrees to sell to B for $500 my white horse. A has 2 white horses.
Evidence may be given of facts which show which of them was meant.
(b) A agrees to accompany B to Halifax. Evidence may be given of facts
showing whether Halifax in Yorkshire or Halifax in Nova Scotia was
meant.

Evidence as to application of language to one of two sets of facts


to neither of which the whole correctly applies
99. When the language used applies partly to one set of existing
facts and partly to another set of existing facts, but the whole of it does
not apply correctly to either, evidence may be given to show to which
of the 2 it was meant to apply.
Illustration
A agrees to sell to B my land at X in the occupation of Y. A has land at X, but
not in the occupation of Y, and he has land in the occupation of Y, but it is not at X.
Evidence may be given of facts showing which he meant to sell.

Evidence as to meaning of illegible characters, etc.


100. Evidence may be given to show the meaning of illegible or not
commonly intelligible characters, of foreign, obsolete, technical, local
Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

71

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

and provincial expressions, of abbreviations and of words used in a


peculiar sense.
Illustration
A, a sculptor, agrees to sell to B all my mods. A has both models and
modelling tools. Evidence may be given to show which he meant to sell.

Who may give evidence of agreement varying terms of


document
101. Persons who are not parties to a document or their
representatives in interest may give evidence of any fact tending to
show a contemporaneous agreement varying the terms of the
document.
Illustration
A and B make a contract in writing that B shall sell A certain tin to be paid for
on delivery. At the same time they make an oral agreement that 3 months credit
shall be given to A. This could not be shown as between A and B, but it might be
shown by C if it affected his interests.

Construction of wills not affected by sections 93 to 101


102. Nothing in sections 93 to 101 shall affect the construction of
wills.
[7/97]

PART III
PRODUCTION AND EFFECT OF EVIDENCE
Burden of proof
Burden of proof
103.(1) Whoever desires any court to give judgment as to any
legal right or liability, dependent on the existence of facts which he
asserts, must prove that those facts exist.
(2) When a person is bound to prove the existence of any fact, it is
said that the burden of proof lies on that person.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

72

Illustrations
(a) A desires a court to give judgment that B shall be punished for a crime
which A says B has committed.
A must prove that B has committed the crime.
(b) A desires a court to give judgment that he is entitled to certain land in the
possession of B by reason of facts which he asserts and which B denies to
be true.
A must prove the existence of those facts.

On whom burden of proof lies


104. The burden of proof in a suit or proceeding lies on that person
who would fail if no evidence at all were given on either side.
Illustrations
(a) A sues B for land of which B is in possession, and which, as A asserts, was
left to A by the will of C, Bs father.
If no evidence were given on either side, B would be entitled to his possession.
Therefore the burden of proof is on A.
(b) A sues B for money due on a bond.
The execution of the bond is admitted, but B says that it was obtained by
fraud, which A denies.
If no evidence were given on either side, A would succeed as the bond is not
disputed and the fraud is not proved.
Therefore the burden of proof is on B.

Burden of proof as to particular fact


105. The burden of proof as to any particular fact lies on that person
who wishes the court to believe in its existence, unless it is provided
by any law that the proof of that fact shall lie on any particular person.
Illustrations
(a) A prosecutes B for theft and wishes the court to believe that B admitted the
theft to C. A must prove the admission.
(b) B wishes the court to believe that at the time in question he was elsewhere.
He must prove it.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

73

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

Burden of proving fact to be proved to make evidence


admissible
106. The burden of proving any fact necessary to be proved in order
to enable any person to give evidence of any other fact is on the person
who wishes to give such evidence.
Illustrations
(a) A wishes to prove a dying declaration by B. A must prove Bs death.
(b) A wishes to prove by secondary evidence the contents of a lost document.
A must prove that the document has been lost.

Burden of proving that case of accused comes within exceptions


107. When a person is accused of any offence, the burden of proving
the existence of circumstances bringing the case within any of the
general exceptions in the Penal Code (Cap. 224), or within any special
exception or proviso contained in any other part of the Penal Code, or
in any law defining the offence, is upon him, and the court shall
presume the absence of such circumstances.
Illustrations
(a) A accused of murder alleges that by reason of unsoundness of mind he did
not know the nature of the act.
The burden of proof is on A.
(b) A accused of murder alleges that by grave and sudden provocation he was
deprived of the power of self-control.
The burden of proof is on A.
(c) Section 325 of the Penal Code provides that whoever, except in the case
provided for by section 335, voluntarily causes grievous hurt shall be
subject to certain punishments.
A is charged with voluntarily causing grievous hurt under section 325.
The burden of proving the circumstances, bringing the case under section 335,
lies on A.

Burden of proving fact especially within knowledge


108. When any fact is especially within the knowledge of any
person, the burden of proving that fact is upon him.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

74

Illustrations
(a) When a person does an act with some intention other than that which the
character and circumstances of the act suggest, the burden of proving that
intention is upon him.
(b) A is charged with travelling on a railway without a ticket. The burden of
proving that he had a ticket is on him.

Burden of proving death of person known to have been alive


within 30 years
109. When the question is whether a man is alive or dead, and it is
shown that he was alive within 30 years, the burden of proving that he
is dead is on the person who affirms it.
Burden of proving that person is alive who has not been heard
of for 7 years
110. When the question is whether a man is alive or dead, and it is
proved that he has not been heard of for 7 years by those who would
naturally have heard of him if he had been alive, the burden of proving
that he is alive is shifted to the person who affirms it.
Burden of proof as to relationship in the cases of partners,
landlord and tenant, principal and agent
111. When the question is whether persons are partners, landlord
and tenant, or principal and agent, and it has been shown that they
have been acting as such, the burden of proving that they do not stand,
or have ceased to stand to each other in those relationships
respectively, is on the person who affirms it.
Burden of proof as to ownership
112. When the question is whether any person is owner of anything
of which he is shown to be in possession, the burden of proving that he
is not the owner is on the person who affirms that he is not the owner.
Proof of good faith in transactions where one party is in relation
of active confidence
113. Where there is a question as to the good faith of a transaction
between parties, one of whom stands to the other in a position of
Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

75

Evidence

CAP. 97

1997 Ed.

active confidence, the burden of proving the good faith of the


transaction is on the party who is in a position of active confidence.
Illustrations
(a) The good faith of a sale by a client to an attorney is in question in a suit
brought by the client. The burden of proving the good faith of the
transaction is on the attorney.
(b) The good faith of a sale by a son just come of age to a father is in question
in a suit brought by the son. The burden of proving the good faith of the
transaction is on the father.

Rebuttable presumption of paternity


114.(1) Where any person was born
(a) during the continuance of a valid marriage between his
mother and any man; or
(b) within 280 days after the dissolution of the marriage, the
mother remaining unmarried,
it shall be presumed that the person is the legitimate child of that man,
unless the contrary is proved.
(2) Subsection (1) shall not apply to a person whose parenthood is
determined under the Status of Children (Assisted Reproduction
Technology) Act 2013.
[Act 16 of 2013 wef 01/10/2014]

115. [Repealed by Act 8/96]


Court may presume existence of certain fact
116. The court may presume the existence of any fact which it thinks
likely to have happened, regard being had to the common course of
natural events, human conduct, and public and private business, in
their relation to the facts of the particular case.
Illustrations
The court may presume
(a) that a man who is in possession of stolen goods soon after the theft is either
the thief or has received the goods knowing them to be stolen, unless he
can account for his possession;

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

76

(b) that an accomplice is unworthy of credit and his evidence needs to be


treated with caution;
(c) that a bill of exchange accepted or endorsed was accepted or endorsed for
good consideration;
(d) that a thing or state of things which has been shown to be in existence
within a period shorter than that within which such things or states of
things usually cease to exist is still in existence;
(e) that judicial and official acts have been regularly performed;
(f) that the common course of business has been followed in particular cases;
(g) that evidence which could be and is not produced would if produced be
unfavourable to the person who withholds it;
(h) that if a man refuses to answer a question which he is not compelled to
answer by law, the answer if given would be unfavourable to him;
(i) that when a document creating an obligation is in the hands of the obligor
the obligation has been discharged.
But the court shall also have regard to such facts as the following in
considering whether such maxims do or do not apply to the particular case before
it:
as to illustration (a)a shop-keeper has in his till a marked dollar soon after it
was stolen and cannot account for its possession specifically but is continually
receiving dollars in the course of his business:
as to illustration (b) A, a person of the highest character is tried for causing a
mans death by an act of negligence in arranging certain machinery. B, a person of
equally good character, who also took part in the arrangement, describes precisely
what was done and admits and explains the common carelessness of A and himself:
as to illustration (b)a crime is committed by several persons. A, B and C, 3
of the criminals, are captured on the spot and kept apart from each other. Each gives
an account of the crime implicating D, and the accounts corroborate each other in
such a manner as to render previous concert highly improbable:
as to illustration (c) A, the drawer of a bill of exchange, was a man of
business. B, the acceptor, was a young and ignorant person completely under As
influence:
as to illustration (d)it is proved that a river ran in a certain course 5 years
ago, but it is known that there have been floods since that time which might change
its course:
as to illustration (e)a judicial act, the regularity of which is in question, was
performed under exceptional circumstances:

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

77

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

as to illustration (f)the question is whether a letter was received. It is shown


to have posted, but the usual course of the post was interrupted by disturbances:
as to illustration (g)a man refuses to produce a document which would bear
on a contract of small importance on which he is sued, but which might also injure
the feeling and reputation of his family:
as to illustration (h)a man refuses to answer a question which he is not
compelled by law to answer, but the answer to it might cause loss to him in matters
unconnected with the matter in relation to which it is asked:
as to illustration (i)a bond is in possession of the obligor, but the
circumstances of the case are such that he may have stolen it.

Presumptions in relation to electronic records


116A.(1) Unless evidence sufficient to raise doubt about the
presumption is adduced, where a device or process is one that, or is of
a kind that, if properly used, ordinarily produces or accurately
communicates an electronic record, the court shall presume that in
producing or communicating that electronic record on the occasion in
question, the device or process produced or accurately communicated
the electronic record.
Illustration
A seeks to adduce evidence in the form of an electronic record or document
produced by an electronic device or process. A proves that the electronic device or
process in question is one that, or is of a kind that, if properly used, ordinarily
produces that electronic record or document. This is a relevant fact for the court to
presume that in producing the electronic record or document on the occasion in
question, the electronic device or process produced the electronic record or
document which A seeks to adduce.

(2) Unless evidence to the contrary is adduced, the court shall


presume that any electronic record generated, recorded or stored is
authentic if it is established that the electronic record was generated,
recorded or stored in the usual and ordinary course of business by a
person who was not a party to the proceedings on the occasion in
question and who did not generate, record or store it under the control
of the party seeking to introduce the electronic record.
Illustration
A seeks to adduce evidence against B in the form of an electronic record. The
fact that the electronic record was generated, recorded or stored in the usual and
Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

78

ordinary course of business by C, a neutral third party, is a relevant fact for the court
to presume that the electronic record is authentic.

(3) Unless evidence to the contrary is adduced, where an electronic


record was generated, recorded or stored by a party who is adverse in
interest to the party seeking to adduce the evidence, the court shall
presume that the electronic record is authentic in relation to the
authentication issues arising from the generation, recording or storage
of that electronic record.
Illustration
A seeks to adduce evidence against B in the form of an electronic record. The
fact that the electronic record was generated, recorded or stored by B, who opposes
the relevance of the evidence, is a relevant fact for the court to presume that the
electronic record is authentic.

(4) For the purposes of subsection (2), in criminal proceedings a


party to the proceedings shall include
(a) the police officer or other officer of a law enforcement agency
who was involved in the investigation of offences allegedly
committed by the accused person; or
(b) an accomplice of the accused person even though he is not
charged with an offence in the same proceedings.
(5) The Minister may make regulations providing for a process by
which a document may be recorded or stored through the use of an
imaging system, including providing for the appointment of one or
more persons or organisations to certify these systems and their use,
and for any matters incidental thereto, and an approved process in
subsection (6) means a process that has been approved in accordance
with the provisions of such regulations.
(6) Where an electronic record was recorded or stored from a
document produced pursuant to an approved process, the court shall
presume, unless evidence to the contrary is adduced, that the
electronic record accurately reproduces that document.
(7) The matters referred to in this section may be established by an
affidavit given to the best of the deponents knowledge and belief.
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

79

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

Estoppel
Estoppel
117. When one person has by his declaration, act or omission
intentionally caused or permitted another person to believe a thing to
be true and to act upon such belief, otherwise than but for that belief he
would have acted, neither he nor his representative in interest shall be
allowed in any suit or proceeding between himself and such person or
his representative in interest to deny the truth of that thing.
Illustration
A intentionally and falsely leads B to believe that certain land belongs to A and
thereby induces B to buy and pay for it.
The land afterwards becomes the property of A and A seeks to set aside the
sale on the ground that at the time of the sale he had no title.
He must not be allowed to prove his want of title.

Estoppel of tenant and of licensee of person in possession


118.(1) No tenant of immovable property, or person claiming
through such tenant, shall during the continuance of the tenancy be
permitted to deny that the landlord of the tenant had at the beginning
of the tenancy a title to the immovable property.
(2) No person who came upon any immovable property by the
licence of the person in possession thereof shall be permitted to deny
that the person had a title to the possession at the time when the licence
was given.
Estoppel of bailee or licensee
119.(1) No bailee, agent or licensee shall be permitted to deny
that the bailor, principal or licensor, by whom any goods were
entrusted to any of them respectively, was entitled to those goods at
the time when they were so entrusted.
(2) Any such bailee, agent or licensee may show that he was
compelled to deliver up any such goods to some person who had a
right to them as against his bailor, principal or licensor, or that his
bailor, principal or licensor wrongfully and without notice to the

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

Evidence

1997 Ed.

CAP. 97

80

bailee, agent or licensee, obtained the goods from a third person, who
has claimed them from such bailee, agent or licensee.
Witnesses
Who may testify
120. All persons shall be competent to testify unless the court
considers that they are prevented from understanding the questions
put to them or from giving rational answers to those questions by
tender years, extreme old age, disease, whether of body or mind, or
any other cause of the same kind.
Explanation A lunatic is not incompetent to testify unless he is prevented by
his lunacy from understanding the questions put to him and giving rational answers
to them.

Dumb witnesses
121.(1) A witness who is unable to speak may give his evidence
in any other manner in which he can make it intelligible, as, for
example, by writing or by signs; but such writing must be written and
the signs made in open court.
(2) Evidence so given shall be deemed to be oral evidence.
Parties to civil suit and their wives or husbands, and husband or
wife of person under criminal trial
122.(1) In all civil proceedings, the parties to the suit, and the
husband or wife of any party to the suit, shall be competent witnesses.
(2) In criminal proceedings against any person, the husband or wife
of such person respectively shall be a competent witness.
(3) In any criminal proceedings, the accused shall be competent to
give evidence on behalf of himself or any person jointly charged with
him, but shall not be compellable to do so.
(4) Where in any criminal proceedings the accused gives evidence,
then, subject to this section and section 56, he shall not in crossexamination be asked, and if asked shall not be required to answer,
any question tending to reveal to the court

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

81

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

(a) the fact that he has committed, or has been charged with or
convicted or acquitted of, any offence other than the offence
charged; or
(b) the fact that he is generally or in a particular respect a person
of bad disposition or reputation.
(5) Subsection (4) shall not apply to a question tending to reveal to
the court a fact about the accused such as is mentioned in
paragraph (a) or (b) thereof if evidence of that fact is (by virtue of
section 14 or 15 of this Act or of section 265 or 266 of the Criminal
Procedure Code 2010 or of any other written law) admissible for the
purpose of proving the commission by him of the offence charged.
[15/2010 wef 02/01/2011]

(6) Where in any criminal proceedings in which 2 or more persons


are jointly charged, any of the accused gives evidence, subsection (4)
shall not in his case apply to any question tending to reveal to the court
a fact about him such as is mentioned in subsection (4)(a) or (b) if
evidence of that fact is admissible for the purpose of showing any
other of the accused to be not guilty of the offence with which that
other is charged.
(7) Subsection (4) shall not apply if
(a) the accused has personally or by his advocate asked any
witness for the prosecution or for a person jointly charged
with him any question concerning the witnesss conduct on
any occasion or as to whether the witness has committed, or
has been charged with or convicted or acquitted of, any
offence; and
(b) the court is of the opinion that the main purpose of that
question was to raise an issue as to the witnesss credibility,
but the court shall not permit a question falling within subsection (4)
to be put to the accused by virtue of this subsection unless it is of the
opinion that the question is relevant to his credibility as a witness.
(8) Subsection (4) shall not apply where the accused has himself
given evidence against any person jointly charged with him in the
same proceedings.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

Evidence

1997 Ed.

CAP. 97

82

Judges and Magistrates


123. No Judge and, except upon the special order of the High Court,
no Magistrate shall be compelled to answer any question as to his own
conduct in court as such Judge or Magistrate or as to anything which
came to his knowledge in court as such Judge or Magistrate; but he
may be examined as to other matters which occurred in his presence
whilst he was so acting.
Illustrations
(a) A, on his trial before the High Court, says that a deposition was improperly
taken by B, the committing Magistrate. B cannot be compelled to answer
questions as to this except upon the special order of the High Court.
(b) A is accused before a District Court of having given false evidence before
B, a District Judge. B cannot be compelled to say what A said except upon
the special order of the High Court.
(c) A is accused of attempting to murder a police officer whilst on his trial
before B, a Judge of the High Court. B may be examined as to what
occurred.

Communications during marriage


124. No person who is or has been married shall be compelled to
disclose any communication made to him during marriage by any
person to whom he is or has been married; nor shall he be permitted to
disclose any such communication unless the person who made it or his
representative in interest consents, except in suits between married
persons or proceedings in which one married person is prosecuted for
any crime committed against the other.
Evidence as to affairs of State
125. No one shall be permitted to produce any unpublished official
records relating to affairs of State, or to give any evidence derived
therefrom, except with the permission of the officer at the head of the
Department concerned, who shall give or withhold such permission as
he thinks fit, subject, however, to the control of the Minister.
[7/97]

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

83

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

Official communications
126.(1) No public officer shall be compelled to disclose
communications made to him in official confidence when he
considers that the public interest would suffer by the disclosure.
(2) No person who is a member, an officer or an employee of, or
who is seconded to, any organisation specified in the Schedule to the
Official Secrets Act (Cap. 213) shall be compelled to disclose
communications made to him in official confidence when he
considers that the public interest would suffer by the disclosure.
[17/2003 wef 26/09/2003]

Information as to commission of offences


127.(1) No Magistrate or police officer shall be compelled to say
whence he got any information as to the commission of any offence.
(2) No revenue officer shall be compelled to say whence he got any
information as to the commission of any offence against the public
revenue or the excise laws.
Explanation Revenue officer in this section means any officer employed
in or about the business of any branch of the public revenue or in or about the
business of any Government farm.

Professional communications
128.(1) No advocate or solicitor shall at any time be permitted,
unless with his clients express consent, to disclose any
communication made to him in the course and for the purpose of
his employment as such advocate or solicitor by or on behalf of his
client, or to state the contents or condition of any document with
which he has become acquainted in the course and for the purpose of
his professional employment, or to disclose any advice given by him
to his client in the course and for the purpose of such employment.
(2) Nothing in this section shall protect from disclosure
(a) any such communication made in furtherance of any illegal
purpose;
(b) any fact observed by any advocate or solicitor in the course of
his employment as such showing that any crime or fraud has
been committed since the commencement of his employment.
Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

84

(3) It is immaterial whether the attention of such advocate or


solicitor was or was not directed to such fact by or on behalf of his
client.
Explanation The obligation stated in this section continues after the
employment has ceased.
Illustrations
(a) A, a client, says to B, a solicitor: I have committed forgery and I wish you
to defend me.
As the defence of a man known to be guilty is not a criminal purpose this
communication is protected from disclosure.
(b) A, a client, says to B, a solicitor: I wish to obtain possession of property by
the use of a forged deed on which I request you to sue.
This communication being made in furtherance of a criminal purpose is not
protected from disclosure.
(c) A, being charged with embezzlement, retains B, a solicitor, to defend him.
In the course of the proceedings B observes that an entry has been made in
As account-book, charging A with the sum said to have been embezzled,
which entry was not in the book at the commencement of his employment.
This being a fact observed by B in the course of his employment, showing that
a fraud has been committed since the commencement of the proceedings, it is not
protected from disclosure.

Communications with legal counsel in entity


128A.(1) A legal counsel in an entity shall not at any time be
permitted, except with the entitys express consent, to disclose any
communication made to him in the course and for the purpose of his
employment as such legal counsel, or to state the contents or condition
of any document with which he has become acquainted in the course
and for the purpose of his employment as such legal counsel, or to
disclose any legal advice given by him to the entity, or to any officer or
employee of the entity, in the course and for the purpose of such
employment.
(2) Nothing in subsection (1) shall protect from disclosure
(a) any such communication made in furtherance of any illegal
purpose;

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

85

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

(b) any fact observed by any legal counsel in an entity in the


course of his employment as such legal counsel showing that
any crime or fraud has been committed since the
commencement of his employment as such legal counsel;
(c) any such communication made to the legal counsel which was
not made for the purpose of seeking his legal advice; or
(d) any document which the legal counsel was made acquainted
with otherwise than in the course of and for the purpose of
seeking his legal advice.
(3) For the purposes of subsection (2)(b), it is immaterial whether
the attention of the legal counsel was or was not directed to that fact by
or on behalf of the entity.
(4) Where a legal counsel is employed by one of a number of
corporations that are related to each other under section 6 of the
Companies Act (Cap. 50), subsection (1) shall apply in relation to the
legal counsel and every corporation so related as if the legal counsel
were also employed by each of the related corporations.
(5) Where a legal counsel is employed by a public agency and is
required as part of his duties of employment or appointment to provide
legal advice or assistance in connection with the application of the law
or any form of resolution of legal dispute to another public agency or
agencies, subsection (1) shall apply in relation to the legal counsel and
the second-mentioned public agency or agencies as if the legal
counsel were also employed by the second-mentioned public agency
or agencies.
(6) For the purposes of subsection (5), public agency includes
(a) the Government, including any ministry, department, agency,
or Organ of State or instrumentality of the Government;
(b) any board, commission, committee or similar body, whether
corporate or unincorporate, established under a public Act for
a public function (referred to in this subsection as a statutory
body);

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

86

(c) any other board, commission, committee or similar body


appointed by the Government, or by a statutory body, for a
public purpose.
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

Sections 128 and 128A to apply to interpreters, etc.


129. Sections 128 and 128A shall apply to interpreters and other
persons who work under the supervision of legal professional
advisers.
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

Privilege not waived by volunteering evidence


130.(1) If any party to a suit gives evidence therein at his own
instance or otherwise, he shall not be deemed to have consented
thereby to such disclosure as is mentioned in section 128 or 128A.
(2) If any party to a suit or proceeding calls any advocate or solicitor
as a witness, that party shall be deemed to have consented to such
disclosure as is mentioned in section 128 only if that party questions
the advocate or solicitor on matters which but for the question the
advocate or solicitor would not be at liberty to disclose.
(3) If any party to a suit or proceeding calls any legal counsel in an
entity as a witness, that party shall be deemed to have consented to
such disclosure as is mentioned in section 128A only if that party
questions the legal counsel on matters which but for the question the
legal counsel would not be at liberty to disclose.
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

Confidential communications with legal advisers


131.(1) No one shall be compelled to disclose to the court any
confidential communication which has taken place between him and
his legal professional adviser unless he offers himself as a witness, in
which case he may be compelled to disclose any such
communications as may appear to the court necessary to be known
in order to explain any evidence which he has given, but no others.
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

(2) In subsection (1) and section 129, legal professional adviser


means

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

87

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

(a) an advocate or solicitor; or


(b) in the case of any communication which has taken place
between any officer or employee of an entity and a legal
counsel employed, or deemed under section 128A(4) or (5) to
be employed, by the entity in the course and for the purpose of
seeking his legal advice as such legal counsel, that legal
counsel.
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

Production of title deeds of witness not a party


132.(1) No witness who is not a party to the suit shall be
compelled to produce his title deeds to any property, or any document
in virtue of which he holds any property as pledgee or mortgagee, or
any document the production of which might tend to criminate him,
unless he has agreed in writing to produce them with the person
seeking the production of such deeds or some person through whom
he claims.
(2) No witness who is a party to the suit shall be bound to produce
any document in his possession or power which is not relevant or
material to the case of the party requiring its production.
(3) No bank shall be compelled to produce the books of such bank in
any legal proceeding to which such bank is not a party, except as
provided by section 174.
Production of documents which another person having
possession could refuse to produce
133. No one shall be compelled to produce documents in his
possession which any other person would be entitled to refuse to
produce if they were in his possession, except for the purpose of
identification, unless such last-mentioned person consents to their
production, nor shall anyone who is entitled to refuse to produce a
document be compelled to give oral evidence of its contents.
Witness not excused from answering on ground that answer
will criminate
134.(1) A witness shall not be excused from answering any
question as to any matter relevant to the matter in issue in any suit, or
Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

Evidence

1997 Ed.

CAP. 97

88

in any civil or criminal proceeding, upon the ground that the answer to
such question will criminate, or may tend, directly or indirectly, to
criminate, such witness, or that it will expose, or tend, directly or
indirectly, to expose, such witness to a penalty or forfeiture of any
kind, or that it will establish or tend to establish that he owes a debt or
is otherwise subject to a civil suit at the instance of the Government or
of any other person.
(2) No answer which a witness shall be compelled by the court to
give shall subject him to any arrest or prosecution, or be proved
against him in any criminal proceeding, except a prosecution for
giving false evidence by such answer.
(3) Before compelling a witness to answer a question the answer to
which will criminate or may tend, directly or indirectly, to criminate
such witness, the court shall explain to the witness the purport of
subsection (2).
(4) Where the
proceedings

accused

gives

evidence

in

any

criminal

(a) he shall not be entitled to refuse to answer a question or


produce a document or thing on the ground that to do so
would tend to prove the commission by him of the offence
charged; and
(b) except as regards any question, document or thing which in
the opinion of the court is relevant solely or mainly to the
accuseds credibility as a witness (not being, in the case of a
question, one asked by virtue of section 56), he shall not be
entitled to refuse to answer a question or produce a document
or thing on the ground that to do so would
(i) tend to expose him to proceedings for some other
offence or for the recovery of a penalty; or
(ii) tend to expose his wife or husband to proceedings for
an offence or for the recovery of a penalty.
(5) Where a person being the wife or husband of the accused gives
evidence in any criminal proceedings, that person

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

89

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

(a) shall not be entitled to refuse to answer a question or produce


a document or thing on the ground that to do so would tend to
prove the commission by the accused of the offence charged;
and
(b) except as regards any question, document or thing which in
the opinion of the court is relevant solely or mainly to that
persons credibility as a witness, shall not be entitled to refuse
to answer a question or produce a document or thing on the
ground that to do so would tend to expose her or him to
proceedings as mentioned in subsection (4)(b)(i).
(6) No answer which an accused or his spouse shall be compelled to
give under subsection (4)(b) or under subsection (5)(b) shall
(a) expose the accused to any proceedings for some other offence
or for the recovery of a penalty or be proved against him in
any such proceedings; or
(b) expose the spouse to any proceedings for an offence or for the
recovery of a penalty or be proved against the spouse in any
such proceedings.
(7) Any reference in this section to proceedings for the recovery of a
penalty includes a reference to civil proceedings therefor.
Accomplice
135.(1) An accomplice shall be a competent witness against an
accused person.
(2) Any rule of law or practice whereby at a trial it is obligatory for
the court to warn itself about convicting the accused on the
uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice is hereby abrogated.
Number of witnesses
136. No particular number of witnesses shall in any case be required
for the proof of any fact.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

90

Examination of witnesses
Order of production and examination of witnesses
137. The order in which witnesses are produced and examined shall
be regulated by the law and practice for the time being relating to civil
and criminal procedure respectively, and in the absence of any such
law by the discretion of the court.
Court to decide as to admissibility of evidence
138.(1) When either party proposes to give evidence of any fact,
the court may ask the party proposing to give the evidence in what
manner the alleged fact, if proved, would be relevant; and the court
shall admit the evidence if it thinks that the fact, if proved, would be
relevant, and not otherwise.
(2) If the fact proposed to be proved is one of which evidence is
admissible only upon proof of some other fact, such last-mentioned
fact must be proved before evidence is given of the fact firstmentioned, unless the party undertakes to give proof of such fact and
the court is satisfied with such undertaking.
(3) If the relevancy of one alleged fact depends upon another alleged
fact being first proved, the court may, in its discretion, either permit
evidence of the first fact to be given before the second fact is proved,
or required evidence to be given of the second fact before evidence is
given of the first fact.
Illustrations
(a) It is proposed to prove a statement about a relevant fact by a person alleged
to be dead, which statement is relevant under section 32.
The fact that the person is dead must be proved by the person proposing to
prove the statement before evidence is given of the statement.
(b) It is proposed to prove by a copy the contents of a document said to be lost.
The fact that the original is lost must be proved by the person proposing to
produce the copy before the copy is produced.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

91

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

(c) A is accused of receiving stolen property, knowing it to have been stolen.


It is proposed to prove that he denied the possession of the property.
The relevancy of the denial depends on the identity of the property. The court
may, in its discretion, either require the property to be identified before the denial of
the possession is proved or permit the denial of the possession to be proved before
the property is identified.
(d) It is proposed to prove a fact (A) which is said to have been the cause or
effect of a fact in issue. There are several intermediate facts (B, C and D)
which must be shown to exist before the fact (A) can be regarded as the
cause or effect of the fact in issue. The court may either permit A to be
proved before B, C or D is proved or may require proof of B, C and D
before permitting proof of A.

Examination-in-chief, cross-examination and re-examination


139.(1) The examination of a witness by the party who calls him
shall be called his examination-in-chief.
(2) The examination of a witness by the adverse party shall be called
his cross-examination.
(3) Where a witness has been cross-examined and is then examined
by the party who called him, such examination shall be called his reexamination.
Order of examinations and direction of re-examination
140.(1) Witnesses shall be first examined-in-chief, then, if the
adverse party so desires, cross-examined, then, if the party calling
them so desires, re-examined.
(2) The examination and cross-examination must relate to relevant
facts, but the cross-examination need not be confined to the facts to
which the witness testified on his examination-in-chief.
(3) The re-examination shall be directed to the explanation of
matters referred to in cross-examination; and if new matter is, by
permission of the court, introduced in re-examination, the adverse
party may further cross-examine upon that matter.
(4) The court may in all cases permit a witness to be recalled either
for further examination-in-chief or for further cross-examination, and

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

Evidence

1997 Ed.

CAP. 97

92

if it does so, the parties have the right of further cross-examination and
re-examination respectively.
Cross-examination of person called to produce a document
141. A person summoned to produce a document does not become a
witness by the mere fact that he produces it, and cannot be crossexamined unless he is called as a witness.
Witnesses to character
142. Witnesses to character may be cross-examined and reexamined.
Leading questions
143. Any question suggesting the answer which the person putting it
wishes or expects to receive or suggesting disputed facts as to which
the witness is to testify, is called a leading question.
When they must not be asked
144.(1) Leading questions must not, if objected to by the adverse
party, be asked in an examination-in-chief or in a re-examination,
except with the permission of the court.
(2) The court shall permit leading questions as to matters which are
introductory or undisputed, or which have in its opinion been already
sufficiently proved.
When they may be asked
145.(1) Leading questions may be asked in cross-examination,
subject to the following qualifications:
(a) the question must not put into the mouth of the witness the
very words which he is to echo back again; and
(b) the question must not assume that facts have been proved
which have not been proved, or that particular answers have
been given contrary to the fact.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

93

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

(2) The court, in its discretion, may prohibit leading questions from
being put to a witness who shows a strong interest or bias in favour of
the cross-examining party.
Evidence as to matters in writing
146. Any witness may be asked whilst under examination whether
any contract, grant or other disposition of property as to which he is
giving evidence was not contained in a document, and if he says that it
was, or if he is about to make any statement as to the contents of any
document which in the opinion of the court ought to be produced, the
adverse party may object to such evidence being given until such
document is produced or until facts have been proved which entitle the
party who called the witness to give secondary evidence of it.
Explanation A witness may give oral evidence of statements made by other
persons about the contents of documents if such statements are in themselves
relevant facts.
Illustration
The question is whether A assaulted B.
C deposes that he heard A say to D: B wrote a letter accusing me of theft and I
will be revenged on him. The statement is relevant as showing As motive for the
assault and evidence may be given of it though no other evidence is given about the
letter.

Cross-examination as to previous statements in writing


147.(1) A witness may be cross-examined as to previous
statements made by him in writing or reduced into writing, and
relevant to matters in question in the suit or proceeding in which he is
cross-examined, without such writing being shown to him or being
proved; but if it is intended to contradict him by the writing, his
attention must, before the writing can be proved, be called to those
parts of it which are to be used for the purpose of contradicting him.
(2) If a witness, upon cross-examination as to a previous oral
statement made by him relevant to matters in question in the suit or
proceeding in which he is cross-examined and inconsistent with his
present testimony, does not distinctly admit that he made such
statement, proof may be given that he did in fact make it; but before

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

94

such proof can be given, the circumstances of the supposed statement,


sufficient to designate the particular occasion, must be mentioned to
the witness, and he must be asked whether or not he made such
statement.
(3) Where in any proceedings a previous inconsistent or
contradictory statement made by a person called as a witness in
those proceedings is proved by virtue of this section, that statement
shall by virtue of this subsection be admissible as evidence of any fact
stated therein of which direct oral evidence by him would be
admissible.
(4) Where a person called as a witness in any proceedings is crossexamined on a document used by him to refresh his memory, that
document may be made evidence in those proceedings.
(5) Where a document or any part of a document is received in
evidence by virtue of subsection (4), any statement made in that
document or part by the person using the document to refresh his
memory shall by virtue of that subsection be admissible as evidence of
any fact stated therein of which direct oral evidence by him would be
admissible.
(6) In estimating the weight, if any, to be attached to a statement
admissible in evidence by virtue of this section regard shall be had to
all the circumstances from which any inference can reasonably be
drawn as to the accuracy or otherwise of the statement and, in
particular, to the question whether or not the statement was made
contemporaneously with the occurrence or existence of the facts
stated, and to the question whether or not the maker of the statement
had any incentive to conceal or misrepresent the facts.
(7) Notwithstanding any other written law or rule of practice
requiring evidence to be corroborated or regulating the manner in
which uncorroborated evidence is to be treated, a statement which is
admissible in evidence by virtue of this section shall not be capable of
corroborating evidence given by the maker of the statement.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

95

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

Questions lawful in cross-examination


148. When a witness may be cross-examined, he may, in addition to
the questions hereinbefore referred to, be asked any questions which
tend
(a) to test his accuracy, veracity or credibility;
(b) to discover who he is and what is his position in life; or
(c) to shake his credit by injuring his character, although the
answer to such questions might tend, directly or indirectly, to
criminate him, or might expose or tend, directly or indirectly,
to expose him to a penalty or forfeiture.
When witness to be compelled to answer
149. If any such question relates to a matter relevant to the suit or
proceeding, section 134 shall apply thereto.
Court to decide when question shall be asked and when witness
compelled to answer
150.(1) If any question relates to a matter not relevant to the suit
or proceeding, except in so far as it affects the credit of the witness by
injuring his character, the court shall decide whether or not the witness
shall be compelled to answer it, and may, if it does not think fit to
compel him to answer the question, warn the witness that he is not
obliged to answer it.
(2) In exercising its discretion, the court shall have regard to the
following considerations:
(a) such questions are proper if they are of such a nature that the
truth of the imputation conveyed by them would seriously
affect the opinion of the court as to the credibility of the
witness on the matter to which he testifies;
(b) such questions are improper if the imputation which they
convey relates to matters so remote in time or of such
character that the truth of the imputation would not affect or
would affect in a slight degree the opinion of the court as to
the credibility of the witness on the matter to which he
testifies;
Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

96

(c) such questions are improper if there is a great disproportion


between the importance of the imputation made against the
witnesss character and the importance of his evidence;
(d) the court may, if it sees fit, draw from the witnesss refusal to
answer, the inference that the answer, if given, would be
unfavourable.
Question not to be asked without reasonable grounds
151. No such question as is referred to in section 150 ought to be
asked unless the person asking it has reasonable grounds for thinking
that the imputation which it conveys is well founded.
Illustrations
(a) An advocate is instructed by a solicitor that an important witness is a
professional gambler. This is a reasonable ground for asking the witness
whether he is a professional gambler.
(b) An advocate is informed by a person in court that an important witness is a
professional gambler. The informant, on being questioned by the advocate,
gives satisfactory reasons for his statement. This is a reasonable ground for
asking the witness whether he is a professional gambler.
(c) A witness of whom nothing whatever is known, is asked at random
whether he is a professional gambler. There are here no reasonable grounds
for the question.
(d) A witness of whom nothing whatever is known being questioned as to his
mode of life and means of living gives unsatisfactory answers. This may be
a reasonable ground for asking him if he is a professional gambler.

Procedure of court in case of question being asked without


reasonable grounds
152. If the court is of the opinion that any such question was asked
without reasonable grounds, the court may, if it was asked by any
advocate or solicitor, report the circumstances of the case to the
Supreme Court in order that the Judges may, if they think fit, exercise
the power to suspend or strike off the roll of advocates and solicitors
given to them under the Legal Profession Act (Cap. 161).

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

97

Evidence

CAP. 97

1997 Ed.

Indecent and scandalous questions


153. The court may forbid any questions or inquiries which it
regards as indecent or scandalous, although such questions or
inquiries may have some bearing on the questions before the court,
unless they relate to facts in issue or to matters necessary to be known
in order to determine whether or not the facts in issue existed.
Questions intended to insult or annoy
154. The court shall forbid any question which appears to it to be
intended to insult or annoy, or which though proper in itself, appears
to the court needlessly offensive in form.
Exclusion of evidence to contradict answers to questions testing
veracity
155. When a witness has been asked and has answered any question
which is relevant to the inquiry only in so far as it tends to shake his
credit by injuring his character, no evidence shall be given to
contradict him; but if he answers falsely he may afterwards be charged
with giving false evidence.
Exception 1.If a witness is asked whether he has been previously convicted
of any crime and denies it, evidence may be given of his previous conviction.
Exception 2.If a witness is asked any question tending to impeach his
impartiality and answers it by denying the facts suggested, he may be contradicted.
Illustrations
(a) A claim against an underwriter is resisted on the ground of fraud.
The claimant is asked whether in a former transaction he had not made a
fraudulent claim. He denies it.
Evidence is offered to show that he did make such a claim.
The evidence is inadmissible.
(b) A witness is asked whether he was not dismissed from a situation for
dishonesty. He denies it.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

98

Evidence is offered to show that he was dismissed for dishonesty.


The evidence is not admissible.
(c) A affirms that on a certain day he saw B at Malacca.
A is asked whether he himself was not on that day at Penang. He denies it.
Evidence is offered to show that A was on that day at Penang.
The evidence is admissible, not as contradicting A on a fact which affects his
credit, but as contradicting the alleged fact that B was seen on the day in question in
Malacca.
(d) A is tried for a rape on B. B is asked in cross-examination whether she has
not had illicit intercourse with C and D. She denies it.
Evidence is offered to show that she has had such intercourse with C and D.
The evidence is not admissible.
In each of the cases in illustrations (c) and (d), the witness might, if the denial
was false, be charged with giving false evidence.
(e) A is asked whether he has not said that he would be revenged on B, against
whom he gives evidence. He denies it.
He may be contradicted on the ground that the question tends to impeach his
impartiality.

Questions by party to his own witness


156. The court may, in its discretion, permit the person who calls a
witness to put any questions to him which might be put in crossexamination by the adverse party.
Impeaching credit of witness
157. The credit of a witness may be impeached in the following
ways by the adverse party or, with the consent of the court, by the
party who calls him:
(a) by the evidence of persons who testify that they from their
knowledge of the witness believe him to be unworthy of
credit;
(b) by proof that the witness has been bribed, or has accepted the
offer of a bribe, or has received any other corrupt inducement
to give his evidence;

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

99

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

(c) by proof of former statements inconsistent with any part of his


evidence which is liable to be contradicted.
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

(d) [Deleted by Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]


Explanation A witness declaring another witness to be unworthy of credit
may not, upon his examination-in-chief, give reasons for his belief, but he may be
asked his reasons in cross-examination, and the answers which he gives cannot be
contradicted, though, if they are false, he may afterwards be charged with giving
false evidence.
Illustrations
(a) A sues B for the price of goods sold and delivered to B.
C says that he delivered the goods to B.
Evidence is offered to show that on a previous occasion he said that he had not
delivered the goods to B.
The evidence is admissible.
(b) A is indicted for the murder of B.
C says that B, when dying, declared that A had given B the wound of which he
died.
Evidence is offered to show that on a previous occasion C said that the wound
was not given by A or in his presence.
The evidence is admissible.

Questions tending to corroborate evidence of relevant fact


admissible
158.(1) When a witness whom it is intended to corroborate gives
evidence of any relevant fact, he may be questioned as to any other
circumstances which he observed at or near to the time or place at
which such relevant fact occurred, if the court is of the opinion that
such circumstances, if proved, would corroborate the testimony of the
witness as to the relevant fact to which he testifies.
(2) Any rule of law or practice whereby in criminal proceedings the
evidence of one witness is incapable of corroborating the evidence of
another witness is hereby abrogated.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

Evidence

1997 Ed.

CAP. 97

100

Former statements of witness may be proved to corroborate


later testimony as to same fact
159. In order to corroborate the testimony of a witness, any former
statement made by such witness, whether written or verbal, on oath, or
in ordinary conversation, relating to the same fact at or about the time
when the fact took place, or before any authority legally competent to
investigate the fact, may be proved.
What matters may be proved in connection with proved
statement relevant under section 32 or 33
160. Whenever any statement relevant under section 32 or 33 is
proved, all matters may be proved either in order to contradict or to
corroborate it, or in order to impeach or confirm the credit of the
person by whom it was made, which might have been proved if that
person had been called as a witness and had denied upon crossexamination the truth of the matter suggested.
Evidence not capable of corroboration
160A. For the purpose of any rule of law or practice that requires
evidence to be corroborated or that regulates the manner in which
uncorroborated evidence is to be treated
(a) a statement that is admissible in evidence by virtue of
section 32(1) is not capable of corroborating evidence given
by the maker of the statement; and
(b) a statement that is admissible in evidence by virtue of
section 32(1)(b) is not capable of corroborating evidence
given by the person who originally supplied the information
from which the statement was made.
[Act 4 of 2012 wef 01/08/2012]

Refreshing memory
161.(1) A witness may while under examination refresh his
memory by referring to any writing made by himself at the time of the
transaction concerning which he is questioned, or so soon afterwards
that the court considers it likely that the transaction was at that time
fresh in his memory.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

101

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

(2) The witness may also refer to any such writing made by any
other person and read by the witness within the time mentioned in
subsection (1), if, when he read it, he knew it to be correct.
(3) Whenever the witness may refresh his memory by reference to
any document, he may, with the permission of the court, refer to a
copy of such document if the court is satisfied that there is sufficient
reason for the non-production of the original.
(4) An expert may refresh his memory by reference to professional
treatises.
Testimony to facts stated in document mentioned in section 161
162. A witness may also testify to facts mentioned in any such
document as is mentioned in section 161 although he has no specific
recollection of the facts themselves, if he is sure that the facts were
correctly recorded in the document.
Illustration
A book-keeper may testify to facts recorded by him in books regularly kept in
the course of business if he knows that the books were correctly kept, although he
has forgotten the particular transactions entered.

Right of adverse party as to writing used to refresh memory


163. Any writing referred to under section 161 or 162 must be
produced and shown to the adverse party if he requires it; such party
may cross-examine the witness thereupon.
Production and translation of documents
164.(1) A witness summoned to produce a document shall, if it is
in his possession or power, bring it to court notwithstanding any
objection which there may be to its production or to its admissibility.
(2) The validity of any such objection shall be decided on by the
court.
(3) The court, if it sees fit, may inspect the document unless it refers
to affairs of State, or take other evidence to enable it to determine on
its admissibility.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

1997 Ed.

Evidence

CAP. 97

102

(4) If for such a purpose it is necessary to cause any document to be


translated, the court may, if it thinks fit, direct the translator to keep the
contents secret unless the document is to be given in evidence; and if
the translator disobeys such direction, he shall be held to have
committed an offence under section 166 of the Penal Code (Cap. 224).
Giving as evidence document called for and produced on notice
165. When a party calls for a document which he has given the other
party notice to produce, and such document is produced and inspected
by the party calling for its production, he is bound to give it as
evidence if the party producing it requires him to do so and if it is
relevant.
Using as evidence document production of which was refused
on notice
166. When a party refuses to produce a document which he has had
notice to produce, he cannot afterwards use the document as evidence
without the consent of the other party or the order of the court.
Illustration
A sues B on an agreement, and gives B notice to produce it. At the trial A calls
for the document, and B refuses to produce it. A gives secondary evidence of its
contents. B seeks to produce the document itself to contradict the secondary
evidence given by A, or in order to show that the agreement is not stamped. He
cannot do so.

Judges power to put questions or order production


167.(1) The Judge may, in order to discover or to obtain proper
proof of relevant facts, ask any question he pleases, in any form at any
time, of any witness or of the parties, about any fact relevant or
irrelevant; and may order the production of any document or thing;
and neither the parties nor their agents shall be entitled to make any
objection to any such question or order, nor, without the leave of the
court, to cross-examine any witness upon any answer given in reply to
any such question.
(2) The judgment must be based upon facts declared by this Act to
be relevant and duly proved.

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

103

CAP. 97

Evidence

1997 Ed.

(3) This section shall not authorise any Judge to compel any witness
to answer any question or to produce any document which such
witness would be entitled to refuse to answer or produce under
sections 123 to 133 if the question were asked or the document were
called for by the adverse party; nor shall the Judge ask any question
which it would be improper for any other person to ask under
section 150 or 151; nor shall he dispense with the primary evidence of
any document, except in the cases excepted in this Act.
Power of assessors to put questions
168. In cases tried with assessors, the assessors may put any
questions to the witnesses through or by leave of the Judge, which the
Judge himself might put and which he considers proper.
Improper admission and rejection of evidence
No new trial for improper admission or rejection of evidence
169. The improper admission or rejection of evidence shall not be
ground of itself for a new trial or reversal of any decision in any case if
it appears to the court before which such objection is raised that,
independently of the evidence objected to and admitted, there was
sufficient evidence to justify the decision, or that, if the rejected
evidence had been received, it ought not to have varied the decision.
PART IV
BANKERS BOOKS
Interpretation
170. In this Part
bank and banker mean any company carrying on the
business of bankers in Singapore under a licence granted
under any law relating to banking;
[37/98 wef 16/11/98]

bankers books includes ledgers, day books, cash books,


account books and all other books used in the ordinary
business of the bank;
Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

Evidence

1997 Ed.

CAP. 97

104

court means the High Court;


legal proceeding means any civil or criminal proceeding or
inquiry in which evidence is or may be given, and includes an
arbitration.
Mode of proof of entries in bankers books
171. Subject to this Part, a copy of any entry in a bankers book shall
in all legal proceedings be received as prima facie evidence of such
entry and of the matters, transactions and accounts therein recorded.
Proof that book is a bankers book
172.(1) A copy of an entry in a bankers book shall not be
received in evidence under this Part unless it is first proved that
(a) the book was, at the time of the making of the entry, one of the
ordinary books of the bank;
(b) the entry was made in the usual and ordinary course of
business; and
(c) the book is in the custody or control of the bank.
(2) Such proof may be given by an officer of the bank and may be
given orally or by an affidavit sworn before any commissioner for
oaths or person authorised to take affidavits.
Verification of copy
173.(1) A copy of an entry in a bankers book shall not be
received in evidence under this Part unless it is further proved that the
copy has been examined with the original entry and is correct.
(2) Such proof shall be given by some person who has examined the
copy with the original entry, and may be given either orally or by an
affidavit sworn before any commissioner for oaths or person
authorised to take affidavits.
Production by, or appearance of, officer of bank
174. An officer of a bank shall not, in any legal proceedings to
which the bank is not a party, be compellable to produce any bankers
book the contents of which can be proved under this Part, or to appear
Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

105

Evidence

CAP. 97

1997 Ed.

as a witness to prove the matters, transactions and accounts therein


recorded, unless by order of a judge made for special cause.
Court or Judge may order inspection
175.(1) On the application of any party to a legal proceeding, the
court or a Judge may order that such party be at liberty to inspect and
take copies of any entries in a bankers book for any of the purposes of
such proceedings.
(2) An order under this section may be made either on or without
summoning the bank or any other party, and shall be served on the
bank 3 clear days before the same is to be obeyed unless the court or
judge otherwise directs.
Costs
176.(1) The costs of any application to the court or a Judge under
this Part, and the costs of anything done or to be done under an order
of the court or a Judge made under this Part, shall be in the discretion
of the court or Judge, who may order the same or any part thereof to be
paid to any party by the bank where the same have been occasioned by
any fault or delay on the part of the bank.
(2) Any such order against a bank may be enforced as if the bank
were a party to the proceeding.
THE SCHEDULE
Section 80A

Statutory Body
1. Board of Commissioners of
Currency, Singapore

Act under which established


Currency Act (Chapter 69).

2. Central Provident Fund Board Central Provident Fund Act


(Chapter 36).
3. Civil Aviation Authority of
Singapore
3A. Civil Service College

Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore


Act 2009.
Civil Service College Act 2001
(Act 29 of 2001).

4. [Deleted by Act 3/2005, wef 10/06/2005.]

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

Evidence

1997 Ed.

CAP. 97

106

THE SCHEDULE continued


Statutory Body
5. Construction Industry
Development Board

Act under which established


Construction Industry Development
Board Act
(Chapter 51).

5A. Defence Science and


Technology Agency
6. Economic Development
Board

Defence Science and Technology


Agency Act 2000.
Economic Development Board Act
(Chapter 85).

6A. Health Sciences Authority

Health Sciences Authority Act


(Chapter 122C).

7. Housing and Development


Board

Housing and Development Act


(Chapter 129).

7A. Info-communications
Development Authority of
Singapore
8. Inland Revenue Authority of
Singapore

Info-communications Development
Authority of Singapore Act 1999.
Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore
Act (Chapter 138A).

8A. Intellectual Property Office of Intellectual Property Office of


Singapore
Singapore Act 2001.
9. Jurong Town Corporation

Jurong Town Corporation Act


(Chapter 150).

10. Land Transport Authority of


Singapore

Land Transport Authority of Singapore


Act (Chapter 158A).

11. Maritime and Port Authority


of Singapore

Maritime and Port Authority of


Singapore Act (Chapter 170A).

12. Monetary Authority of


Singapore

Monetary Authority of Singapore Act


(Chapter 186).

13. [Deleted by Act 41/99, wef 01/12/1999]


14. Public Utilities Board

Public Utilities Act (Chapter 261).

15. Singapore Broadcasting


Authority

Singapore Broadcasting Authority Act


(Chapter 297).

15A. Singapore Land Authority


16. Singapore Productivity and
Standards Board

Singapore Land Authority Act 2001.


Singapore Productivity and Standards
Board Act

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

107

Evidence

CAP. 97

1997 Ed.

THE SCHEDULE continued


Statutory Body
17. Singapore Tourism Board

Act under which established


(Chapter 303A).
Singapore Tourism Board Act
(Chapter 305B).

18. [Deleted by Act 41/99, wef 01/12/1999]


19. Trade Development Board

Trade Development Board Act


(Chapter 330).

20. Urban Redevelopment


Authority

Urban Redevelopment Authority Act


(Chapter 340).
[S 414/92; 29/95; 1/96; 7/96]
[S 210/2011 wef 01/05/2011]
[3/2005 wef 10/06/2005]
[S 613/2001 wef 12/12/2001]
[9/2000 wef 15/03/2000]
[41/99 wef 01/12/1999]
[3/2001 wef 01/04/2001]
[17/2001 wef 01/06/2001]
[17/2009 wef 01/07/2009]

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
EVIDENCE ACT
(CHAPTER 97)
This Legislative History is provided for the convenience of users of the Evidence
Act. It is not part of the Act.
1. Ordinance 3 of 1893 Evidence Ordinance 1893
Date of First, Second and Third
Readings

: Dates not available

Date of commencement

: 1 July 1893

2. Ordinance 12 of 1895 Evidence (Amendment) Ordinance 1895


Date of First, Second and Third
Readings

: Dates not available

Date of commencement

: Date not available

3. Ordinance 29 of 1907 Evidence Ordinance Amendment Ordinance


1907
Date of First, Second and Third
Readings

: Date not available

Date of commencement

: 10 December 1907

4. Ordinance 29 of 1935 Evidence (Amendment) Ordinance 1935


Date of First Reading

: Date not available


(Bill published on 14 June 1935.
No Bill number given)

Date of Second and Third Readings

: 26 August 1935

Date of commencement

: 13 September 1935

5. Ordinance 44 of 1949 Bankers Books Evidence (Amendment)


Ordinance 1949
Date of First Reading

: 19 October 1949
(Bill published on 28 October
1949. No Bill number given)

Date of Second and Third Readings

: 15 November 1949

Date of commencement

: 2 December 1949

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

ii
6. Ordinance 8 of 1955 Revised Edition of the Laws (Miscellaneous
Amendments) Ordinance 1955
Date of First Reading

: 14 December 1954
(Bill No. 45/54 published on
17 December 1954)

Date of Second and Third Readings

: 28 January 1955

Date of commencement

: 11 February 1955

7. G. N. No. S(NS) 177/1959 The Singapore Constitution (Modification of


Laws) (No. 3) Order 1959
Date of commencement

: 20 November 1959

8. G. N. No. S(NS) 178/1959 The Singapore Constitution (Modification of


Laws) (No. 4) Order 1959
Date of commencement

: 20 November 1959

9. G. N. No. S(NS) 179/1959 The Singapore Constitution (Modification of


Laws) (No. 5) Order 1959
Date of commencement

: 20 November 1959

10. Ordinance 72 of 1959 Transfer of Powers (No. 2) Ordinance 1959


Date of First Reading

: 22 September 1959
(Bill No. 31/59 published on
30 September 1959)

Date of Second and Third Readings

: 11 November 1959

Date of commencement

: 20 November 1959

11. Ordinance 17 of 1960 Evidence (Amendment) Ordinance 1960


Date of First Reading

: 13 August 1959
(Bill No. 14/59 published on
21 August 1959)

Date of Second Reading

: 2 September 1959

Referred to Select Committee

: L.A. 2 of 1960

Date of Third Reading

: 13 February 1960

Date of commencement

: 26 February 1960

12. LN 71/1965
Date of commencement

: Date not available

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

iii
13. G. N. No. S 39/1966 The Modification of Laws (Evidence) Order 1966
Date of commencement

: 4 March 1966

14. 1970 Revised Edition Evidence Act (Cap. 5)


Date of operation

: 1 March 1971

15. Act 14 of 1969 Statute Law Revision Act 1969


Date of First Reading

: 15 October 1969
(Bill No. 22/69 published on
20 October 1969)

Date of Second and Third Readings

: 22 December 1969

Date of commencement

: 2 January 1970

16. Act 11 of 1976 Evidence (Amendment) Act 1976


Date of First Reading

: 29 July 1975
(Bill No. 34/75 published on
5 August 1975)

Date of Second and Third Readings

: 23 July 1976

Date of commencement

: 1 January 1977

17. Act 28 of 1987 Evidence (Amendment) Act 1987


Date of First Reading

: 9 November 1987
(Bill No. 19/87 published on
11 November 1987)

Date of Second and Third Readings

: 30 November 1987

Date of commencement

: 1 February 1988

18. 1990 Revised Edition Evidence Act


Date of operation

: 15 March 1990

19. G. N. No. S 414/1992 The Evidence Act (Amendment of Schedule)


Order 1992
Date of commencement

: 25 September 1992

20. Act 29 of 1995 Rapid Transit Systems Act 1995


(Consequential amendments made by)
Date of First Reading

: 7 July 1995
(Bill No. 25/95 published on
8 July 1995)

Date of Second and Third Readings

: 7 August 1995

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

iv
Date of commencement

: 1 September 1995

21. Act 7 of 1996 Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore Act 1996
(Consequential amendments made by)
Date of First Reading

: 5 December 1995
(Bill No. 46/95 published on
6 December 1995)

Date of Second and Third Readings

: 18 January 1996

Date of commencement

: 2 February 1996

22. Act 8 of 1996 Evidence (Amendment) Act 1996


Date of First Reading

: 5 December 1995
(Bill No. 45/95 published on
6 December 1995)

Date of Second and Third Readings

: 18 January 1996

Date of commencement

: 8 March 1996

23. Act 1 of 1996 Singapore Productivity and Standards Board Act 1996
(Consequential amendments made by)
Date of First Reading

: 1 November 1995
(Bill No. 39/95 published on
2 November 1995)

Date of Second and Third Readings

: 5 December 1995

Date of commencement

: 1 April 1996

24. Act 7 of 1997 Statutes (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act 1997


Date of First Reading

: 11 July 1997
(Bill No. 6/97 published on
12 July 1997)

Date of Second and Third Readings

: 25 August 1997

Date of commencement

: 1 October 1997
(except section 3)

25. 1997 Revised Edition Evidence Act


Date of operation

: 20 December 1997

26. Act 25 of 1998 Electronic Transactions Act 1998


(Consequential amendments made to Act by)
Date of First Reading

: 1 June 1998
(Bill No. 23/98 published on
2 June 1998)

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

v
Date of Second and Third Readings

: 29 June 1998

Date of commencement

: 10 July 1998
(section 64)

27. Act 37 of 1998 Post Office Savings Bank of Singapore (Transfer of


Undertakings and Dissolution) Act 1998
(Consequential amendments made to Act by)
Date of First Reading

: 31 July 1998
(Bill No. 34/1998 published on
1 August 1998)

Date of Second and Third Readings

: 12 October 1998

Date of commencement

: 16 November 1998
(item (4) in the Schedule)

28. Act 41 of 1999 Info-communications Development Authority of


Singapore Act 1999
(Consequential amendments made to Act by)
Date of First Reading

: 11 October 1999
(Bill No. 36/1999 published on
12 October 1999)

Date of Second and Third Readings

: 23 November 1999

Date of commencement

: 1 December 1999
(item 8(2) in the Fourth
Schedule)

29. Act 9 of 2000 Defence Science and Technology Agency Act 2000
(Consequential amendments made to Act by)
Date of First Reading

: 17 January 2000
(Bill No. 1/2000 published on
18 January 2000)

Date of Second and Third Readings

: 21 February 2000

Date of commencement

: 15 March 2000
(item (2) in the Schedule)

30. Act 3 of 2001 Intellectual Property Office of Singapore Act 2001


(Consequential amendments made to Act by)
Date of First Reading

: 12 January 2001
(Bill No. 1/2001 published on
13 January 2001)

Date of Second and Third Readings

: 22 February 2001

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

vi
Date of commencement

: 1 April 2001
(item (3) in the Fourth Schedule)

31. Act 17 of 2001 Singapore Land Authority Act 2001


(Consequential amendments made to Act by)
Date of First Reading

: 5 March 2001
(Bill No. 17/2001 published on
6 March 2001)

Date of Second and Third Readings

: 19 April 2001

Date of commencement

: 1 June 2001
(item (4) in the Fourth Schedule)

32. G. N. No. S 613/2001 Evidence Act (Amendment of Schedule)


Order 2001
Date of commencement

: 12 December 2001

33. Act 17 of 2003 Evidence (Amendment) Act 2003


Date of First Reading

: 14 August 2003
(Bill No. 16/2003 published on
15 August 2003)

Date of Second and Third Readings

: 2 September 2003

Date of commencement

: 26 September 2003

34. Act 3 of 2005 CISCO (Dissolution) Act 2005


(Consequential amendments made to Act by)
Date of First Reading

: 19 October 2004
(Bill No. 52/2004 published on
20 October 2004)

Date of Second and Third Readings

: 25 January 2005

Date of commencement

: 10 June 2005
(item (3) in the Third Schedule)

35. Act 51 of 2007 Penal Code (Amendment) Act 2007


(Consequential amendments made to Act by)
Date of First Reading

: 17 September 2007
(Bill No. 38/2007 published on
18 September 2007)

Date of Second and Third Readings

: 22 October 2007

Date of commencement

: 1 February 2008
(item (3) in the Third Schedule)

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

vii
36. Act 17 of 2009 Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore Act 2009
(Consequential amendments made to Act by)
Date of First Reading

: 23 March 2009
(Bill No. 10/2009 published on
23 March 2009)

Date of Second and Third Readings

: 13 April 2009

Date of commencement

: 1 July 2009
(item (4) in the Fourth Schedule)

37. Act 15 of 2010 Criminal Procedure Code 2010


(Consequential amendments made to Act by)
Date of First Reading

: 26 April 2010
(Bill No. 11/2010 published on
26 April 2010)

Date of Second and Third Readings

: 19 May 2010

Date of commencement

: 2 January 2011
(item (39) of the Sixth Schedule)

38. G. N. No. S 210/2011 Evidence Act (Amendment of Schedule)


Order 2011
Date of commencement

: 1 May 2011

39. Act 4 of 2012 Evidence (Amendment) Act 2012


Date of First Reading

: 16 January 2012
(Bill No. 2/2012 published on
16 January 2012)

Date of Second and Third Readings

: 14 February 2012

Date of commencement

: 1 August 2012

40. Act 5 of 2014 Subordinate Courts (Amendment) Act 2014


(Consequential amendments made to Act by)
Date of First Reading

: 11 November 2013
(Bill No. 26/2013 published on
11 November 2013)

Date of Second and Third Readings

: 21 January 2014

Date of commencement

: 7 March 2014
(item (10) in the Schedule)

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015

viii
41. Act 27 of 2014 Family Justice Act 2014
Date of First Reading

: 8 July 2014 (Bill No. 21/2014


published on 8 July 2014)

Date of Second and Third Readings

: 4 August 2014

Date of commencement

: 1 October 2014

42. Act 16 of 2013 Status of Children (Assisted Reproduction Technology)


Act 2013
Date of First Reading

: 8 July 2013 (Bill No. 12/2013


published on 8 July 2013)

Date of Second and Third Readings

: 12 August 2013

Date of commencement

: 1 October 2014

43. Act 41 of 2014 Statutes (Miscellaneous Amendments Deputy


Attorney-General) Act 2014
Date of First Reading

: 7 October 2014 (Bill No.


37/2014 published on 7 October
2014)

Date of Second and Third Readings

: 4 November 2014

Date of commencement

: 1 January 2015

Informal Consolidation version in force from 1/1/2015